SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Ker) 489

P.A.MOHAMMED
Mathai – Appellant
Versus
Anna – Respondent


JUDGMENT

P.A. Mohammed, J.

1. The petitioner in this writ petition claims to be a 'cultivating tenant' in respect of five acres of land. He filed an application O. A. No 240/71 before the Land Tribunal for assignment of jenmom rights under S.72B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act (for short 'the Act'). That application was dismissed on the ground that respondents 1 and 2 had already obtained purchase certificate in respect of the very same land. As against the said order of the Land Tribunal, the petitioner filed an appeal before the third respondent under S.102 of the Act. That appeal happened to be dismissed on the ground of a submission made by the petitioner's counsel to the effect that appeal was not pressed. Ext. P1 is the copy of the judgment. Since the submission made before the Appellate Authority was due to an inadvertent mistake on the part of the counsel, the petitioner prepared a review petition and attempted to file it before the Appellate Authority. Ext. P2 is the copy of the said review petition. However that petition was not entertained by the office and it was returned without assigning any reason. It was in that situation the present writ petition was filed. (The origi















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top