Sukumaran, J.

S.32 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act has been interpreted differently by judges of this Court. The conflict of views and the resulting confusion, understandably dim the vision of those having the duty to decide. Justice Kader noted the discomforting discord in the judicial opinion and made an order of reference on 21-3-1984. We have to, and therefore proceed to, answer it.

2. The section which generated discord in judicial voice appears simple, at any rate at the first blush. Let us extract it:

"During the pendency of an application for determination- of fair rent before a Land Tribunal, no Court shall entertain any suit for eviction of the applicant from the holding to which the application relates, or pass any order of injunction prohibiting him from entering the holding or pass any order staying the proceedings before the Land Tribunal".

3. The first interpretation came from Krishna Iyer, J. when he was sitting in this Court: Kadir Mohammed v. Augusthy Varghese, 1969 K.L.T. 739. In the very next year, Sadasivan, J. made a different approach in applying the section. Holding that the section was-attracted to the facts, the learned judge adjourned the suit sine