ORDER.-The 2nd Respondent, Santhakumari in M.R.I. 117 (R) NNL (A3) before the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms), Mayuram is the revision petitioner herein. Proceedings were taken against the revision petitioner and Ammani Ammal in respect of the lands belonging to the said petitioner and Ammani Ammal. A draft statement was published under section 10 (1) of Act LVIII of 1961. The first respondent herein filed objections under section 10 (5) of the said Act stating that the lands stated in the objection petition have to be excluded from the holdings of Radhakrishna. Naidu as he happened to be a life estate holder. According to the objector, the lands mentioned in the objection petition are vested in him and hence the same has to be deleted from the holdings and further proceedings taken in the light of the objections. The petitioner and the second respondent herein contended that the objector has no right, title or interest in the property mentioned in his objection petition and nothing has vested in him.

2. To understand the case, it is necessary to refer to certain facts of this case. One Ramachandra Naidu, had two sons by name R. G. Rajan and Radhakrishnan. Gurumurthy, the objector

Click Here to Read the rest of this document