K.P.RADHAKRISHNA MENON
Muhammed Shaheer – Appellant
Versus
Nanu Vidyadharan – Respondent
K.P. Radhakrishna Menon, J.
1. The short question arising for consideration in these appeals is this : Are the defendants in the suits from out of which these appeals arise, who admittedly are claiming the benefit of S.106 of The Kerala Land Reforms Act, entitled to have the question relating to the said tenancy referred to the Land Tribunal under S.125(3) of the K. L. R. Act.
2. Before we go into the merits of this point, it is necessary to understand the content of S.106. S.106 provides that notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, or in any other law, or in any contract, or in any order or decree of court, where on any land leased for commercial or industrial purpose, the lessee has constructed buildings for such commercial or industrial purpose before the 20th May, 1967, he shall not be liable to be evicted from such land, but shall be liable to pay rent under the contract of tenancy, and such rent shall be liable to be varied every twelve years. On a reading of this section it can be seen that it is a code by itself. That means the rights of the parties are to be determined only with reference to the provisions contained in this Section. That is the intention of t
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.