MATHAI MATHAI Vs. JOSEPH MARY @ MARYKKUTTY JOSEPH
LAWS(SC)-2014-4-92
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: KERALA)
Decided on April 25,2014

MATHAI MATHAI Appellant
VERSUS
Joseph Mary @ Marykkutty Joseph Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

V.K. MOHAMMED HABEBULLA VS. H.M. VENKATASWAMY [LAWS(KAR)-2014-12-136] [REFERRED TO]
LAL KESHARI DEVI VS. SMT. KAMLA DEVI [LAWS(PAT)-2016-9-127] [REFERRED TO]
KAUSHIK PREMKUMAR MISHRA VS. KANJI RAVARIA @ KANJI [LAWS(SC)-2024-7-78] [REFERRED TO]
SURU BHASKAR RAO VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ORISSA AND ORS. [LAWS(ORI)-2016-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
KANHAIYA VS. RAMESH CHAND [LAWS(RAJ)-2022-5-8] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order dated 1.7.2005 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Civil Revision Petition No. 873 of 1997(C) allowing the Civil Revision Petition and rejecting the O.A. No. 230 of 1981, urging various facts and legal contentions.
(2.)Necessary relevant facts of the case are stated hereunder:-
The appellant herein filed Original Application No. 230 of 1981 before the Land Tribunal, Kottayam claiming to be a deemed tenant under Section 4A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "the K.L.R. Act") read with Kerala Land Reforms Tenancy Rules (for short "the Tenancy Rules") and stating that his uncle had executed a mortgage deed in the year 1909-1910 in favour of the appellant's mother late Smt. Aley as a collateral security for a sum of 7000 Chakram which was the dowry amount.

(3.)It is the case of the appellant that his mother has been in possession of the land involved in the case as a mortgagee from the date of execution of the mortgage deed referred to and she has been in continuous possession of the same for more than 50 years as on the date of the commencement of the K.L.R. Act (substituted by Act 35 of 1969) immediately preceding the commencement of the Kerala Land Reforms (Amendment) Act, 1969 which was published in the Kerala Gazette Extraordinary No. 295 dated 17.12.1969 w.e.f. 1.1.1970. Therefore, he should be registered as deemed tenant in respect of the land in question as it has conferred a statutory right on him to purchase the mortgaged land in toto to the extent of 2 acres 48 cents. In the said proceedings the father of the appellant got impleaded and opposed the claim made by the appellant and further denied that the mother of the appellant had right as the mortgagee and was in possession and holding the land as a deemed tenant for the 50 years immediately preceding the amended provisions of Section 4A of the K.L.R. Act, which provision came into effect from 1.1.1970. Therefore, he has contended that he is not entitled to be registered as a deemed tenant and cannot obtain purchase certificate of the land in question as per Section 72B of the K.L.R. Act. Vide order dated 21.3.1994, the Land Tribunal, after recording the finding of fact, held that the appellant is a deemed tenant under Sections 4A of the K.L.R. Act and therefore, he is entitled to get the purchase certificate.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.