K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

These appeals have been preferred against the common judgment in O.P.Nos. 9914,9792, 10716 of 1989 and the judgment in O.P.No. 7767 of 1993 respectively.

2. Question which arises for consideration in all these appeals is the same. Some of the respondents in these appeals, who are members of the Scheduled Tribes, preferred applications under S.6(2) of the Kerala Scheduled Tribes (Restriction on Transfer of Lands and Restoration of Alienated Lands) Act, 1975, for restoration of their lands. The Sub-Collector issued notices to the appellants against whom complaints were preferred by the members of the Scheduled Tribes. In O.P. Nos. 9792 and 10716 of 1989, the only objection taken was that the applications themselves were time-barred, and therefore, not maintainable. The main objection taken in O.P.No. 10716 of 1989 by the petitioner therein was that she became the owner of the land in question by virtue of a transfer effected by third parties as per the certificate of purchase produced by her. All the applications preferred by the members of the Scheduled Tribes were allowed by the Sub Collector. Ext. P1 is the order in all these cases. The ground of l