SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Ker) 383

R.BHASKARAN
Kutty Nanu – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent


Judgment :-

R. Bhaskaran, J.

These. three second appeals 'arise out of the same suit and first appeal. There were 41 plaintiffs in O:S. No. 487 of 1978 on the file of the Munsiff, Thiruvalla. That suit was for a declaration that they are members belonging to Hiridu Mala Araya Community. It is stated that t11ey are entitled for the benefits available to the members of the Scheduled Tribe and the falVily members of the plaintiffs' were given such benefits by the State. Since the Tahsildar refused caste certificate to the children of the plaintiffs' stating that plaintiffs are not Hindu Mala Araya, the suit is filed.

2. The trial court decreed he suit. The decision of the trial court was based on Ext. A I patta in respect of 17 cents of property assigned on registry in favour of the Mala Araya Karayogam, Ext. _2 true copy of the schedule showing the distribution of population numerically important Scheduled Tribes of Kerala and certain certificates issued by the Tahsildar, Thinivalla, to some of the relatives of the petitioners. The contention of the defendants is that the plaintiffs belong to Araya Community which is not included in the list of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes. Araya







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top