Judges : GEORGE VADAKKEL
MADHAVAN KUTTY NAIR - Appellant
Versus
APPELLATE AUTHORITY (L.R.), ALLEPPEY - Respondent
Case No : O. P. No. 3460 of 1975
Decided On : 08/17/1976
Advocates Appeared :
N. Venkatarama Iyer; For Petitioner Government Pleader; For Respondents 1; 2 S. Parameswaran; For Respondent 3
Kerala Land Reforms Act - Kudikidappukaran - S.80A
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner claimed that the 3rd respondent, a kudikidappukaran, had erected a homestead on the petitioner's land and sought clarification on the 3rd respondent's entitlement to purchase land under S.80A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Land Tribunal and the Appellate Authority did not adequately consider the extent of land available for purchase and the land on which the kudikidappu is situate, and directed the Land Tribunal to reconsider these questions.
Issues: The main issue was the interpretation of S.80A and the entitlement of a kudikidappukaran to purchase land adjoining the kudikidappu.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the phrase 'the land available' should be understood as a reasonable person in the locality would understand it, and directed the Land Tribunal to determine the extent of available land and the land on which the kudikidappu is situate based on local understanding.
Final Decision: The court quashed the previous orders and directed the Land Tribunal to reconsider the questions of available land and the extent of land on which the kudikidappu is situate.
1. Admittedly the 3rd respondent is a kudikidappukaran who has erected a homestead on the petitioner's land. It is the case of the petitioner that except 4 cents of land adjoining the kudikidappu occupied by the 3rd respondent the rest are paddy fields belonging to the petitioner. The question raised is as to whether on an application filed under S.80A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 by the 3rd respondent for purchase of his kudikidappu he is entitled to purchase, any land ether than the 4 cents adjoining the kudikidappu and which are not paddy fields. The 2nd respondent, the Land Tribunal, did not in Ext PI order advert to this question. It is said therein, (Ext. P1 order) that the 3rd respondent is allowed to purchase 1C cents of land in the survey number mentioned in that order from the respondent as marked in the sketch appended to that order, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner would mean that the 3rd respondent is entitled to purchase 6 cents of paddy fields besides the 4 cents of land which is not paddy field adjoining the kudikidappu. For that reason the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent, the Appellate Authority who as per Ext P 2 judgment held that he was not in a position to accept the contention advanced on behalf of the appellant that the paddy field portion cannot be made available for purchase. The appellate authority so said interpreting the proviso to sub-section (3) of S.80A along with the proviso to sub-section (2) of the same section. According to the appellate authority the latter proviso would indicate that the kudikiddappukaran is entitled to purchase the legitimate extent as per the statute from the land in which the kudikidappu is situate as well as the adjacent land of the landowner. The correctness of this decision is challenged before me by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. S.80A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 enables, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force, a kudikidappukaran to purchase the kudikidappu occupied by him and lands adjoining thereto, but subject to the provisions of S.80A Sub-section (2) of that section restricts the right of purchase to cases other than those where the land owner has not applied to the Government under S.75 (3) of the Act for the acquisition of land, to which the kudikidappu may be shifted, within a period of 2 years from the commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969 and where such application has been filed, the same has been rejected or the applicant has failed to pay the expenses of shifting the kudikidappu as required by sub-S. (3C) of S.75. Subsection (3) of S.80A prescribes the extent of the adjoining land referred to in sub-S. (1) which the kudikidappukaran is entitled to purchase. That subsection says that he shall be entitled to purchase from the adjoining lands 3 cents it the kudikidappu is situate in a city or major municipality, 5 cents if the same is situate in any other municipality and 10 cents if it is situate in a panchayat area or township The extent so prescribed which the kudikidappukaran is entitled to purchase is further subjected to a restriction by the proviso to that sub-section which reads:
"Provided that where the land available for purchase in the land in which the kudikidappu is situate, or the land in which the kudikidappu is situate, is less than the extent specified in this sub-section, the kudikidappukaran shall be entitled to purchase only the land available for purchase, or as the case maybe, the land in which the kudikidappu is situate."
I am not in this case concerned with the further sub-sections to S.80A of the Act. The question for consideration is as to whether sub-section (3) mentioned above read with the proviso thereto would in all cases enable the kudikidappukaran to purchase 3 cents, 5 cents or 10 cents, as the case may be, if the land adjoining the kudikidappu and belonging to th
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.