1. These appeals arise out of suits withdrawn to this Court under Art.228 of the Constitution, as they involved the interpretation of some provisions of the Constitution, and disposed of by a learned judge of this Court. The constitutional question was whether Art.14,19 and 31 of the Constitution stood in the way of the validity of S.53 of the Malabar Tenancy Act. Madhavan Nair, J. held that Art.31A of the Constitution applied and therefore Art.14,19 and 31 did not apply.

2. Under S.53 of the Malabar Tenancy Act, which provision was added to the Act by Act VII of 1954, it is provided that any document executed by a cultivating verumpattomdar after the 28th of July 1950 (the date of publication of Act XXXIII of 1951) & before 20th March 1954 (the date of commencement of Act VII of 1954) purporting to affect his rights or status as tenant shall be voidable at the option of the cultivating verumpattomdar. The tenants who surrendered their tenancy rights by documents executed during the relevant period have filed the suits for avoiding the surrenders. It is the validity of S.53 that is being challenged.

3. The first argument advanced before us is that there was no landlord an