The main legal point established in the judgment is that the disqualification to the status of a kudikidappukaran would be attracted only if the person is in possession of land exceeding ten cents, on which he could erect a homestead.

1. This Revision Petition has been referred to a Full Bench to consider the correctness of the ruling of a Division Bench of this Court in Kumaran v. Prabhakaran Pillai (1977 KLT. 53). The matter arises out of an application for purchase of the kudikidappu under S.80-B of the Land Reforms Act. The respondent to that application, whom we may call the 'landlord' is the revision petitioner before us. The application. (O.A. 290 of 1971) was filed on 19-10-1971 by one Malothparambil Ariyayi before the Land Tribunal, Chelannur. In the relevant column the right on which she claimed was described as: right of succession ]n3XpSkmhImiw . This has given rise to a contention on behalf of the revision petitioner that the claim of the applicant was as heir of her mother, Mangot Vayalil Ariyayi, who died only on 9-1-1976, and that an application as heir, on succession to the mother, was not maintainable, when made. The mother was in possession of the properties in question with the permission of the landlord. She had obtained an assignment from the District Welfare Officer, Calicut, on 16-7-1969, of an extent of land, which the revision petitioner claimed to be of an extent of 101/2 cents, and which, the Land Tribunal and the appellate authority concurred in finding to be only ten cents. They have further found that the 10 cents of land so assigned to the applicants mother was fit for putting up a homestead. On these facts, the Land Tribunal and the appellate authority allowed the application for purchase, overruling the only; objection which seems to have raised before them, that the applicant was disqualified by reason of possession of land in excess of the limit indicated by S.2 (25) of the Land Reforms Act. In addition to this objection it was urged before us that the application itself was not maintainable as heir of the applicant's mother, as the mother herself was alive on the date of the application. This latter ground of objection was not raised either before the Land Tribunal, or before the appellate authority and it is manifestly unjust to allow the revision petitioner to raise this objection for the first time at this stage. We are also satisfied that the same should not come within the scope of the limited grounds of challenge available to the revision-petitioner under S 103 of the Land Reforms Act. On these grounds, we overrule this objection.

2. That leaves us with the next ground of objection that the applicant was in possession of lands in excess of the statutory limit fixed by S.2 (25) of the Land Reforms Act. That clause defines "kudikidappukaran". The definition in so far as it is material reads:

"(25) "kudikidappukaran" means a person who has neither a homestead nor any land exceeding in extent three cents in any city or major municipality or five cents in any; other municipality or ten cents in any Panchayat area or township, in possession either as owner or as tenant, on which he could erect a homestead and

x x x

Explanation II For the purposes of this clause,

(a) 'hut' means any dwelling house constructed by a person other than the person permitted to occupy it (i) at a cost, at the time of construction, not exceeding seven hundred and fifty rupees;

or (ii) which could have at the time of construction yielded a monthly rent not exceeding five rupees, and includes any such dwelling house reconstructed by the kudikidappukaran in accordance with the provisions of S.79; and

(d) 'homestead' means, unless the context otherwise requires, any dwelling house erected by the person permitted to have the use and occupation of any land for the purpose of such erection, and includes any such dwelling house reconstructed by the kudikidappukaran in accordance with the provisions of S.79.

The opening paragraph of the definition, on its plain language, seems to require that in order to entitle a person to the status of a kudikidappukaran he should not, interalia, have any land, "exceeding" for the purposes of this case ten cents on