P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.

The petitioners herein are the legal representatives of the original defendant in O.S.373 of 1987 filed by the plaintiffs, the respondents herein.

2. The predecessor of the plaintiffs filed R.C.P. 37 of 1980 under S.11 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act before the Rent Controller for eviction from a building occupied under him by the defendant. The defendant while resisting that application contended that he was a kudikidappukaran as defined in the Kerala Land Reforms Act and was not liable to be evicted under the Rent Control Act. It is to be noted that a Kudikidappukaran as defined in the Land Reforms Act is taken out of the definition of a tenant under the Rent Control Act. A question of kudikidappu having arisen for decision, the Rent Controller in view of the mandate contained in S.125(3) of the Land Reforms Act read in the light of S.125(8) of that Act referred the question of kudikidappu to the concerned Land decision. The Land Tribunal returned a finding that the building involved was a hut and the defendant was a kudikidappukaran. Accepting that finding, the Rent Controller dismissed the application for eviction filed un