1999 INSC 0044
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Easo Yohannan (D) by Lrs.

Vs.

Bahelamma Koshy

                              (K.T.Thomas, D.P.Wadhwa and S.S.M.Quadri JJ.)

21.01.1999

ORDER

The Text below is only a summarized version of the order pronounced

The High Court had interfered with the concurrent findings of the courts on the grounds that the
lease was originally granted by Annamma who was the widow of the original owner, who had only
a limited interest and hence such a lease was exempted from the provisions relating to fixity of
tenure and so the heirs of the original owners are entitled to a decree for recovery of possession. It
was also found that the respondent had also joined her as a lessor and it had to be examined whether
the respondent was a co-owner of the property who was entitled to lease the land. The High Court
had not examined when it found that Annamma, was only a limited owner, as to whether the lease
created in favour of the appellant by the said Annamma in conjunction with the respondent would
attract the beneficial provisions in Section 13 and 72 of the Kerela Land Reforms Act, 1963. It is
not possible to give a decree for recovery of possession of the suit property without considering
these aspects. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the second appeal is
remitted back to the High Court