Kunnumbron Vasu v. The State of Kerala
Case at a glance
Outcome
Set aside
The orderimpugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Taluk LandBoard for fresh consideration in the light of the findings herein above
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Counsel for the petitioners also wanted to take advantage ofthe amendment effected by the K.L.R. Amendment Act, 2005. Since Iam inclined to remand the matter back to the Taluk Land Board, I amnot adverting to the said contention. It is open to the petitioners…
Judgment
CRP 1584/99-: 2 :-the properties held by the petitioners as assignees should be excludedfrom surrendering. This aspect was not considered by the Taluk LandBoard or by this Court while dismissing C.R.P.No.380 of 1991. Thereview was allowed and the order of the Taluk Land Board was setaside and the Taluk Land Board was directed to consider theapplication filed by the petitioners under Section 85(8) of the K.L.R.Act with notice to the legal representatives and take a decisionthereon.
Following the order passed by this Court in C.R.P.No.380 of1991 notice was issued to the legal representatives of the declarantand the order impugned was passed by the Taluk Land Board onceagain negativing the claim of the petitioners. It would appear that thepetitioners had produced documents in support of their contention thatthe legal representatives of the declarant held other propertiesrequiring exclusion of the property held by them. However, the TalukLand Board has not dealt with those documents or the contention inthis behalf and proceeded to decline relief to them once again.
A reading of the review order would show that the Taluk LandBoard was obliged to consider the above noted contentions raised bythe petitioners. But since the Taluk Land Board has not considered the CRP 1584/99-: 3 :-same, I am inclined to set aside the order of the Taluk Land Board anddirect the Taluk Land Board to consider the matter afresh with noticeto all the parties.
Operative part
Counsel for the petitioners also wanted to take advantage ofthe amendment effected by the K.L.R. Amendment Act, 2005. Since Iam inclined to remand the matter back to the Taluk Land Board, I amnot adverting to the said contention. It is open to the petitioners totake advantage of the provisions of the Amendment Act. The orderimpugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Taluk LandBoard for fresh consideration in the light of the findings herein above. Civil Revision Petition is disposed of as above. Antony DominicJudge.ess 31/1
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The orderimpugned is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Taluk LandBoard for fresh consideration in the light of the findings herein above
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Kerala LandReforms Act — s. 85(8); K.L.R. Amendment Act, 2005.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 31 Jan 2007. The bench was ANTONY DOMINIC.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.