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

1993 Supreme(Ker) 278

K.J.JOSEPH, VARGHESE KALLIATH
Ayyappan Manuvel – Appellant
Versus
Annal Joice – Respondent


Judgment :-

These cases come before us for determination of a general question regarding court fee, what is the court fee that has to be paid on a revision petition filed before the High Court under S.103 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the act). This question was considered by a learned single judge of this Court in Subramanian Namboodiri v. Sankaran (1984 KLT 615). Justice Thulasidas doubted the correctness of the above decision and referred the matter for the decision of a Division Bench.

2. At the outset, we shall give the bony facts of these cases without any legal lacing. C.R.P.No.964 of 1993 is a revision against the final order in an appeal under S.102 of the Act. The proceedings was under S.80B of the Act for purchase of kudikidappu. The tribunal allowed the application and fixed the purchase price the land owner filed an appeal under S.102 of the Act. The appellate authority dismissed 'the appeal. The land owner seeks revision of the orders in this revision petition.

3. C.R.P.No.965/93 relates to proceedings for purchase of the land owner's right vested with the Government. 11 was a suo mote proceedings. The land tribunal found t ha t the 'A' par
















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