K.K. Usha, J.

This appeal has come up before the Full Bench in view Of the conflict between two Bench decisions of this Court, namely, Veerasikku Gounder v, Korah Kurian,1960 KLT 213 and Moideenkutty v. Subhadra & Ors., 1966 KLT 1125. The issue involved is whether a transferee under a void document would come within the definition of 'tenant' in S.2(d)(iii) of the Kerala Compensation for Tenants Improvements Act, 29 of 195 8 and can claim compensation for the improvements made, by him on the property. In 1960 KLT 213, it was held that the transferee who had to surrender possession of the property on finding that the document under which he acquired title to the property was to be set aside would come within the definition of 'tenant'. Any improvements effected by him on the land covered by the sale must be taken to have been effected by him in the bonafide belief that he is entitled to make such improvements because of the existence of the sale in his favour. In 1966 KLT 1125 supra, it was held that a purchaser of a property from a person who had no title to it whatsoever cannot be considered to be a person who has made any purchase whatsoever. Therefore, he will not com