Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SAVITHRIKUTTY AMMA, W/O. SOMASEKHARAN versus THE TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SAVITHRIKUTTY AMMA, W/O. SOMASEKHARAN v. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD - CRP No. 550 of 2005 [2007] RD-KL 14711 (1 August 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRP No. 550 of 2005()

1. SAVITHRIKUTTY AMMA, W/O. SOMASEKHARAN
... Petitioner

2. DEEPA @ MRINALINI, D/O. SOMASEKHARAN

Vs

1. THE TALUK LAND BOARD, PALAKKAD
... Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

3. P.M. NARAYANAN, S/O. P.M. NEELAKNTAN

For Petitioner :SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

Dated :01/08/2007

O R D E R

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C.R.P.No.550 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Dated: 1st August, 2007

ORDER

A claimant under Section 85(8) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act is aggrieved by the order passed by the Taluk Land Board negativing the claim mainly on the reason that the documents relied on are all subsequent to 1.1.1970. My attention was drawn by Mr.Sajan Varghese, learned counsel for the revision petitioners to Act 21 of 2006 under which Section 7E was introduced into the Land Reforms Act and corresponding amendments were made to Section 84. Mr.Shyson P.Manguzha, learned Government Pleader would submit that the Taluk Land Board has also observed that it is on the basis of an invalid document (a gift deed written on white paper) that the documents of title claimed by the petitioners were executed in their favour. But I find that the decision of the Taluk Land Board turns not on the above reason but on the reason that the documents are executed after 1.1.1970. I therefore set aside the impugned order and direct the Taluk Land Board, Palakkad to take a fresh decision. The Taluk Land Board will take into account the implications of the amending act, Act 21 of 2006 including the implication of newly introduced Section 7E. The validity of the title also can be considered C.R.P.No.550/05 - 2 - by the Taluk Land Board. Fresh decision as directed above will be taken by the Taluk Land Board after hearing the petitioners and anybody else who may be affected by the order. The C.R.P. is allowed to the above extent. No costs.

srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.