The main legal point established in the judgment is that all the four conditions mentioned in S.4A (1) should be cumulatively satisfied for a person to claim the benefit thereof, and S.4A applies only to certain mortgagees of waste lands who satisfy all the four conditions mentioned therein.

1. This is an appeal by the defendant in a suit for redemption of immovable property in the possession of the defendant as mortgagee. The trial court decreed the suit on 12-8-1965. There was an appeal by the defendant; and it was dismissed on 1211967.On 20 71967, the decree-holder filed an execution petition for getting possession of the property from the defendant with mesne profits, on deposit of the mortgage amount and value of improvemen's. The Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act 9 of 1967, passed by the Kerala Legislature, came into force on 30 71967. This Act shall cease to have effect on 3112 1968. S.4 of the Act gave some protection to tenants and Kudikidappukars from eviction. It reads as follows:

"4. Stay of eviction proceedings. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law, or in any contract, custom or usage, or in any judgment, decree or order of any court or Land Tribunal, with effect on and from the commencement of this Act, no suit or application or other proceedings for

(a) eviction of a tenant from his holding or part thereof or eviction or shifting of a kudikidappukaran from his kudikidappu; or

(b) resumption of a holding or part thereof from a tenant, shall lie in any court or Land Tribunal, and all suits, applications, proceedings in execution of decrees or orders and other proceedings pending in courts or Land Tribunals at such commencement for such eviction, shifting or resumption shall be stayed:

Provided that nothing in this section shall be deemed to affect the operation of S.14 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (I of 1964)."

S.10 of the Act made certain amendments to the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963. One of the amendments was to insert S.4A after S.4 in the Land Reforms Act. S.4A reads as follows:

"4A. Certain mortgagees of waste lands to be deemed tenants. (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law, or in any contract, custom or usage, or in any judgment, decree or order of court, a mortgagee with possession of immovable property shall be deemed to be a tenant, if

(a) the property comprised in the mortgage was waste :land at the time of mortgage. Explanation. For the purposes of this clause, a land shall be deemed to be waste land notwithstanding the existence thereon of scattered trees;

(b) the mortgage money was less than forty per-cent of the market value of the land at the time of mortgage;

(c) he was by himself or through any member of his family or tarwad holding the property comprised in the mortgage for a period of not less than thirty years before the commencement of the Kerala Stay of

Eviction Proceedings Act, 1967;

(d) he or any member of his family or tarwad effected substantial improvements on the property comprised in the mortgage.

(2) The mortgage money or any portion thereof may, at the option of the mortgagor, be treated as security for rent and he shall return the mortgage money or any portion thereof which he does not elect to treat as security for rent to the tenant within six months from the commencement of the Kerala Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act, 1967."

"Tenant" is defined in S.2 (57) of the Land Reforms Act. This was also amended by the Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act, with the result that "tenant" includes also a person who is deemed to be a "tenant" under S.4, 4A, 5, 6, 6A and 7 to 10. Under S.13 of the Land Reforms Act, even such a tenant is entitled to fixity of tenure, subject to certain provisions contained therein. The result of the aforesaid statutory provisions is that a mortgagee with possession of immovable property falling within the ambit of S.4A of the Land Reforms Act would not be liable for eviction by virtue of S 4 of the Stay of Eviction Proceedings Act; and he would also be entitled to fixity of tenure by virtue of S.13 of the Land Reforms Act, notwithstanding a decree for redemption against him. The appellant, therefore, filed an objection to the execution of the decree by the respondent, stating th