Joseph Vithayathil, J.

These five appeals were heard together since common questions of law arise for consideration in these appeals.

S.A. No. 779 of 1950

The 2nd defendant in O.S. No. 1587 of 1119 of the Sherthallai Munsiff’s Court is the appellant in this Second Appeal. The appeal relates to an order in execution refusing to stay delivery of the decree schedule property under the Travancore Holdings (Stay of Execution Proceedings) Act (Act VIII of 1950). The decree is for recovery of possession of property on the basis of a document which, according to the plaintiff, is a mortgage, while according to the defendants, is a kanapattom. When the plaintiff applied for delivery of possession of the property the 1st defendant objected contending that Act VIII of 1950 applied to the case and that delivery of possession of the property should be stayed as provided in that Act. He also contended that the case would come within the purview of Act XXII of 1124 (The Travancore Prevention of Eviction Act). The execution court held that Act VIII of 1950 would not apply to the case, that the 1st defendant was not a kudikidappukaran coming within the purview of Act XXII of 1124 and therefo