MAMMU versus HARI MOHAN AND ANR.

MAMMU versus HARI MOHAN AND ANR.

An order of remand by the Appellate Authority is a final order under Section 103(1)(i) and is subject to revision. However, appellant is not entitled to kudikidappu rights as the structure is appurtenant to the shop room, not an independent structure.

Parties
Appellant: Mammu; Respondent No.1: Hari Mohan; Respondent No.2: Respondent No.2
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
07 January 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Revision Under Kerala Land Reforms Act
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Kerala Land Reforms Act, Kudikidappu Rights, Revision Petitions, Interlocutory Vs Final Orders
Land Law Kerala Land Reforms Act Kudikidappu Rights Revision Petitions Interlocutory Vs Final Orders

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mammu

Appellant

Hari Mohan

Respondent No.1

Respondent No.2

Respondent No.2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From High Court Revision Under Kerala Land Reforms Act

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an order of remand by the Appellate Authority is a 'final order' under Section 103(1)(i) of Kerala Land Reforms Act and thus open to revision
  2. 2 Whether appellant is entitled to claim kudikidappu rights in respect of the structure in question

Ratio Decidendi

An order of remand by the Appellate Authority is a final order under Section 103(1)(i) and is subject to revision. However, appellant is not entitled to kudikidappu rights as the structure is appurtenant to the shop room, not an independent structure.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed without order as to costs
  • Supreme Court vacates High Court's finding that no revision would lie against remand order by Appellate Authority