A mortgagee in continuous possession for over 50 years, whether under contract or statute, can be deemed a tenant and entitled to compensation for improvements under the Kerala Land Reforms Act.

1. This civil revision petition arises from an order dated 1121975 made by the learned Munsiff, Attingal, whereby the petitioner's application under S.132 (3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1964 ('the Act'), was rejected on the ground that the petitioner was not a tenant within the meaning of S.4A of the Act.

2. The petitioner was the 4th defendant in O.S. No. 6 of 1964 which was a suit for redemption. The suit was decreed on 23121955. The decree provided for the payment of a sum of Rs. 500/-together with the value of improvements determined at Rs. 943.92 as a condition for redemption. The value of improvements was enhanced in appeal by Rs. 256.84. The decree-bolder filed execution petition. The petitioner filed C.M.P. No. 16315 of 1960 on 111 1960 claiming the benefits of the Kerala Compensation for Tenants' Improvements Act, 1958 (Act 29/58). Thereafter the decree holder (the present respondent) deposited in Court on 2161961 the amount payable under the decree. In August 1975, the petitioner's application for the value of improvements in terms of Act 29 of 1958 was allowed by the execution court and the total value (including the amount provided in the decree) was determined at Rs. 4149.66. The appeals filed by the petitioner against the order in CMP.16315 of 1960 were rejected. Thus the value of improvements, as determined by the execution court, after deducting from it the amount already deposited by the respondent on 2161961 in terms of the decree, became due and payable by the respondent to the petitioner. Admittedly the balance amount has neither been paid over to the petitioner nor deposited in court. The petitioner filed I.A. No. 2340/75 to reopen the decree in terms of S.132 (3) of the Act. That application was rejected by the impugned order against which the petitioner filed an appeal which was found to be not maintainable, for there was no provision for appeal.

3. This civil revision petition was filed only on 25 71977. If the period taken in appeal is to be excluded, the CRP. cannot be considered to have been filed out of time. The appeal was prosecuted in the bona fide belief that it was maintainable, although it later turned out to be not so. In the circumstances I am of the view that S.14 of the Limitation Act applies to the present case, and I hold that the CRP. is filed within time

4. The contractual relationship between the petitioner and the respondent ended on 2161961 on deposit of the decree amount. The deposit was made at a time when the petitioner's application under Act 29 of 1958 was pending. This Act allows a tenant to continue in possession of the holding until the compensation payable under the Act is paid and he shall, as a statutory tenant, hold the land subject to the terms of the contract, although bis contractual relationship with the landlord ended on payment to him of the amounts due under the contract. A tenant is defined to include a mortgagee. A mortgagee whose contractual relationship with the mortgagor expired on deposit of the decree amount, but who has not been paid the compensation due under Act 29 of 1958, remains in possession of the holding as a statutory mortgagee subject to the terms and conditions of the mortgage I shall now read S.4 of Act 29/58:

"4. Tenant entitled to compensation for improvements. (1) Every tenant shall, on eviction, be entitled to compensation for improvements which were made by him, his predecessor-in-interest or by any person not in occupation at the time of the eviction who derived title from either of them and for which compensation bad not already been paid and every tenant to whom compensation is so due shall, notwithstanding the determination of the tenancy on the payment or tender of the mortgage money or premium, if any, be entitled to remain in possession until eviction in execution of a decree or order of court:

Provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed as affecting the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957;

P