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

1979 Supreme(Ker) 145

Judges : P.SUBRAMONIAN POTI,P.JANAKI AMMA
KURUVILLA - Appellant
Versus
TALUK LAND BOARD - Respondent
Case No : C. R. P. No. 5523 of 1976
Decided On : 09/12/1979
Advocates Appeared :
K. Chandrasekharan; P.N.K. Achan; K. Vijayan For Petitioner Government Pleader; For Respondents

S.82(4) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act operates prospectively and specifies the date for reckoning the nature of the land for determining the ceiling area, and does not impose a penalty but provides a rule for determining the extent of land to be surrendered.

Headnote:

Land Reforms Act - Applicability of S.82(4) to a Firm - S.82(1) and (4) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act - Summary of Acts and Sections

Fact of the Case:

The revision was against an order passed by the Taluk Land Board, Talappally on 30-10-1976, directing surrender of excess land. The main point urged concerned the applicability of S.82(4) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act to a firm.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that S.82(4) operates to ignore certain types of land conversion after a specified date, and that the determination of the extent of land to be surrendered shall be done without taking into consideration conversions after the specified date.

Issues: The main issue concerned the applicability of S.82(4) to a firm and the exemption of land from the provisions of Chapter III based on its nature as on 1-4-1964.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that S.82(4) operates prospectively and specifies the date for reckoning the nature of the land for determining the ceiling area. The court also emphasized that S.82(4) does not impose a penalty but provides a rule for determining the extent of land to be surrendered.

Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the Taluk Land Board to enable the petitioner to adduce evidence on the objection and directed a fresh disposal in accordance with the law.

Judgment :-

1. This revision has come up before the Division Bench on a reference by our learned brother Justice M. P. Menon. Since the learned judge felt that the view expressed in the decision of this Court in Vellappally Plantations Private Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 1977 KLT. 265, required further consideration reference was made to the Division Bench.

2. The revision was against an order passed by the Taluk Land Board, Talappally on 30-10-1976. The said order was passed in proceedings taken against a firm 'Desamangalam Estate' for surrender of excess land. The firm is represented by its Managing Partner who has filed this appeal on behalf of the firm. The objection to the draft statement (dated 11-10-76) was filed by the Managing Partner on 13-10-1976. It is said that at that time the Managing Partner assumed that proceedings were taken against him not in regard to the firm as such but in regard to his share of the properties of the firm and therefore he assumed that he was called upon to reply only as an individual in regard to his share. He filed an additional objection on 30-10-1976 raising certain contentions on behalf of the firm. He mentioned in the application moved by his counsel on 30-10-1976 that it was under the impression that he was called upon to answer as a partner only that he had filed the earlier objection and now that it had turned out that the proceedings were being taken against him on behalf of the firm and as representing the firm additional objection was being filed. He also mentioned therein that he was filing the additional objection on that day, that he required time for adducing evidence, that the Managing Partner was out of station he having gone to Bangalore and a week's time may be given to him for adducing evidence. On this application an order 'not allowed' is seen passed on the same day. The matter was taken up by the Taluk Land Board and disposed of on the same day directing surrender of excess land the extent of which is seen to be 105.76

acres.

3. The main point urged by petitioner's counsel before us concerns the applicability of S, 82(4) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act to a firm. It is the case of the petitioner that S.82 of the Act having been amended to bring in firms also within the scope of that Section only with effect from 1-1-1970, S.82(4) as amended would not operate in the case of firms in respect of any conversion made prior to 1-1-1970. There is the further argument that in any view of the matter 94.04 acres of land belonging to the firm in Ottappalam Taluk was a private forest even on 1-4-1964 and therefore was exempt from the provisions of Chapter III and if so the land would not be available for the purpose of determining the ceiling area of the firm even on 1-4-1964.

4. S.82(1) and (4) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as it stands now read thus: 82. "Ceiling area.-(1) The ceiling area of land shall be,

(a) in the case of an adult unmarried person or a family consisting of a sole surviving member, five standard acres, so however that the ceiling area shall not be less than six and more than seven and a half

acres in extent;

(b) in the case of a family consisting of two or more, but not more than five members, ten standard acres, so however that the ceiling area shall not be less than twelve and more than fifteen acres in extent;

(c) in the case of a family consisting of more than five members, ten standard acres increased by one standard acre for each member in excess of five, so however that the ceiling area shall not be less than twelve and more than twenty acres in extent; and

(d) in the case of any other person, other than a joint family, ten standard acres, so however that the ceiling are shall not be less than twelve and more than fifteen acres in extent.

................................................................................................................................. .................................................................................................























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top