LAND LAWS IN KERALA Compiled & Edited by N. Krishna Kumar B.Sc., LL.M., PGDCrJA. Guest Lecturer, School of Legal Studies, Cochin University of Scienceé&Technology; ‘School of Legal Thought, M.G.University, Kottayam, & George Johnson M.A; LL.B Dominic Johnson B.A.(Hons.); LLB Anu Susan Dominic B.A; LL.B Advocates, Ernakulam, Distributors LAW BOOKS CENTRE Banerjee Road, (Opp. Popular A\ Ernakulam, Kochi - Tel: (0484) 362456 / 371678 qe | BUSS RissPrice Rs.130/- Allrights reserved Published by EM TEE EN PUBLICATIONS 44/900 A, Perandoor Road Kaloor, Kechi- 682.017. Tel: (0484) 531839 Printed at: Sterling Print House Emakulam, Every effort has been made to avoid errors or omissions inthis publication. In spl errors may creep in. Any mistake, eror or discrepan from. tis suggested that to avoid any doubt ialerias ofthe publication with original Government publication or PUBLISHERS: 1B 14. 15. 16. 17. INTRODUCTION CONCEPT OF REAL PROPERTY (IMMOVABLE PROPERTY) -.sccscnenenneeecnenntnnenne 23 CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PROPERTY ... LAND REFORMS ... LAND ACQUISITION gy LAND CEILING LAND CONSERVANCY LAND DEVELOPMENT... LAND UTILISATION ... ESCHEATS AND FOREFITURES ..... VESTING AND ENFRANCHISEMENT.. REVENUE RECOVERY ACT =... BUILDING (LEASE & RENT CONTROL) ACT FOREST ACT. RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER OF LANDS AND RESTORATION OF ALIENATED LANDS ... TRUSTS ACT ... EASEMENTS ACT.GENERAL CONTENTS 2ABLE OF CASES 1, INFRODUCTION .. ¢ 3 CONCEPT OF REAL PROPERTY ) ) 4. LAND REFORMS . CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PROPERTY CONTENTS DETAILED CONTENTS ‘The Hindu Period ‘The Muslim Period Feudal System ..... Feudal System in Kerala Land Tenure in Travancore A. Jenmom Lands B. Sirkar Lands ..... ... Land Tenure in Cochin and Malabar... Travancore - Cochin Land Legislation .... Land Legislation after the formation of Kerala State... Land to the Tiller Policy (IMMOVABLE PROPERTY) Saving of Laws Providing for Acquisition of Estates etc Valuation of Certain Acts and Regulations... Saving of Laws giving effect of certain Directive Principles... 42 Article 300A, Introduction... Constitutionality.... Definition and Concepts. 47 Kudikidappukaran ... iol Tenant 55 Deemed Tenants 56 Fixity of Tenure Ceiling Area... 59 Exemptions .. z 0 Purcahse of Landlords right by cultivating tenants 61 Special provisions relating to Religious & Charitable Institutions ...... ol Land Tribunal, Appellate Authority & Land Board 2 Taluk Land Boards se 68 CONTENTS ‘ v) tution of Land Reforms Review Board Powers of the Tribunal & Land Board... Excess Land than Ceiling Area Surrender of Excess Land Vesting in Government Appeals & Revisions - Solatium to Small Holders Leases for Commercial or Industrial Purpose... ‘Special Funds 5. LAND ACQUISITION... Definitions. Acquisition «00. a Reference to Court & Procedure thereor ‘ 92 Apportionment of Compensation ... is 8 Payment c 9 “Temporay occupation of Lan 101 Acquisition of Land for Companies. 102 LAND CEILING nese 112 - 135 Introduction Objects : Salient Features snr 113 Important Definition & Concepts 14 Ceiling on Vacant land & Exemption therefrom... 7 Exemptions from Ceiling 4122 Exemption in Public Interest... e 123 Excess Vacant Land not to be treated as excess 124 Retention of Vacant Land under certain circumstances ..... 124 112 3 ‘Transfer of Vacant Land is 125 Statements by persons holding excess land «nese 126 ‘Acquisition of Vacant Land in Excess of Ceiling limit 127 Payment of amount for Land Acquited ns: 128 Disposal of Land Acquired under the Act -..... 129 Regulation of Transfer and use of Urban Property 130 Registration of Transfers é 133 Regulation of Construction oP Buildings 133 Functions of Tribunal ete, under the Act 1347. LAND CONSERVANCY 8. LAND DEVELOPMENT CONTENTS 136 - 149 Definition of property ot eas 13) Definition of poramboke - 138 Definition of Occupant ... 139 Punishment for unathorisedly occupying land which is the property of Government 141 Prior notice to occupant. 145 Power to make rules 146 Officers to exercise powers of Collector . 146 Appeal and revision Limitation for appeal and revision 146, Land Development Board ...... 3 Powers of Government to direct preparation of schemes .. Functions of the Board Constitution of District Committees . Functions of the District Committee .. Padasekharam Committee ... Functions of the Padasekharam Committee Matters for which a scheme may Provided Preparation of schemes Publication of Scheme and inviting objections Appointment of Executing Officer Powers of the Executing Officer Payment of work... Power to enforce scheme Power on Government to carry out works under a scheme .. 160 Liability of persons whose lands are not included in the scheme to contribute Reference to. Coutts ... Power to make, grant or advance loan Terms and conditions for grant of loans under Section 18 Right of entry. Records of rights and liabilities Repayment to be made in instalments Calculation of Interest .. Obligation of owners of Lands to maintain and repair the works. Notification of areas and control over them Power to regulate, resirict, or prohibit, certain Jl. VESTING AND ENFRANCHISEMENT..... CONTENTS vi within the notified area .... Proclamation of order under Section 23 and admission of claims for compensations ...... Inquiries into claims and award of compensation .. Method of awarding compensation Amount to be recoverable as arrears of land revenue Permission to owners to increase rent on account of, ) improvements effected ... Certain Officers to be Publi suits and Prosecutions .. 167 Vacancies amongst members 168 Schemes relating to areas lying in more than one \68 Power to make rules 168 Repeal... 268 LAND UTILISATIO! “2 Introduction... . 310 Power of the State Government to specify the crops tobe produced .. ee yo ESCHEATS AND FOREFITURES..... Escheats .. : Preliminary enquiry . Appeal .. Disposal of Escheats Taking Possession by Collector Saving of rights to sue Unclaimed Property . Publication in the Gazette. Forfeiture of Articles Power of Government to make rules eoneIT9 = 1. Vesting of the rights of landowners in Government and abolition of services .. Amount to be paid by the Government... Land holders's right to assignment Purchase Price Settlement Officer to issue noice and determine the compensation and purchase price { Payment of amount to the landowner to be full discharge... *wa CONTENTS Issue of pattas and other documents to land holder... 183 Amount due to the Government to be recoverable under the Revenue Recovery Act Orders of Settlement Officer to be deemed of civil court, eee 184 . 184 ) . 184 185 Settlement Officers iene 18S Powers of Settlement Officer, District Collector and Board of Revenue . 186 Decision of disputes as to whether lands Service Ina Land. 186 Bar of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts 186 Protection of action taken in good fai - 186 ) Power to remove difficulties 187 : Power to make rules 3 187 42. REVENUE RECOVERY ACT ws. 205 Introduction... - 188 Definitions 189 Modes for recovery of arrears of public revenue ) due on land 190 Procedure followed for Auachment Sale of Movable Propenyi91 Demand Notice .. 191 Properties which cannot be attached fee lO2 } Attachment shall not be excessive . 192 Attachment and sale of movable property (other than growing crops and ungathered products) 192 Sale of Movable Property. 193, Attachment and sale of growing crops or ungathered products ..... 194 Attachment o in the poss 194 Attachment of Decree 195 Attachment of share in Movable Property 195 Attachment of Negotiable Instruments 195 ‘The Attachment of Property in the Custody of Court or public Officer... 195 Attachment of Partnership Property 195 Attachment of Rents... .. 196 Power to enter Dwelling House 197 Procedure followed for Attachment and Sale of Immovable CONTENTS Property Demand Notice Mode of attachment ‘ Management of Attached Property . Appointments of Agents ties of Agents... le of Immovable Property Bidding on behalf of Government Stay of Sale .n. Setting aside of sale of immovable property Confirmation of Sale... i Delivery of Possession Arrest and Detention of Defaulter 13. BUILDING (LEASE & RENT CONTROL) ACT Introduction. 3 ue 4 Definitions Constitution of Rent Control Court Notice of Vacancy Right of tenant paying rent or advances to receipt. Right to tenant to deposit rent is certain cases Eviction of Tenant Payment of Deposit of Rent during the pendency of proceedings for eviction Landlord not to interfere with amenities enjoyed by the tenant... Eviction of Orders Appeal ... Costs... Revision .. Power to remand Exemptions, Penalties : Fixation of fair rent suo motu by Court Restoration of Possession in certain cases. KERALA FOREST ACT .. Definitions Reserved Forests. Forest Settlement O1 Protection of land at the dispo@&l of Govern included in Reserved Forests...x CONTENTS CONTENTS xr 15. RESTRICTION ON TRANSFER OF LANDS AND TABLE OF CASES RESTORATION OF ALIENATED LANDS ... .246 - 258 Important Definitions and Concepts, 246 * A.MAnsari v. Board of Revenue Restriction on transfer of property a DAT ‘Abdul Rahman y, Hameed Hassan Peruvad Bar on proceedings against Scheduled ‘Tribes - 253 Abdulrahiman y. Lekshmi Powers of competent authority and Revene Divisional See obokar ie Aedes Yoder Officer ..... = 254 Achuthan y., District Collector. * ‘Aliakutty Paul v, State of Kerala and ‘others. 59 = 271 “Alipilla and others V. S10te nce vr 259 ‘alivakutry Paul v. State of Kerala. 223 assification of Trusts + 260 Anand Nivas (P.) Lid. . Anad fference between Charitable Trusts and Private Trusts... 262 | ‘Andi v. State Duties and liabilities of Trustees ... 263 “Appu w. Tahsildar cn 14d Rights, Powers and disabilities of the Trustee .. 265 | Asha v. District Collector... . 200 Rights and liabilities of Beneficiary - 267 | Asha ». District Collector 202 Revocation of Trusts = - 268 Asst. Commissioner Urban Land Ceiling ¥. Obligation in the nature of Trusts .. 269 | 1BM World Trade Corporation eee 133 ‘Atul Hazara v. Uma Charan 17. EASEMENTS ACT .... saee272 = 286 B.Vinod Kumar y, D. Ravindernath. Definition + 272 Babu Singh v. Union of India Characteristics 272 Baby v. State of Kerala & Oth€r8 om. Balmadies Plantation v. Tamil Nadu Balmadies Plantations Ltd. v, State of Tamil Nadi | Bapi Raju y. Andhra Pradhesh 2 Basantibai v. State 1c Bava ¥. Maulan Azad §.C.C. Library ais Bharat Petroleum Corp. Lid. and another v. a % Municipal Corporate of greater Bombay and another... soe DB 214 74 215 216 Difference between Licence and Easemer Different between Easement and Lease: ‘Types of Easements Imposition of Easement .. Acquisition of easement Easement of Necessity... Quasi Easement... Easement by Prescription Bhargavan v. D.EO 241 Customary Easement - 280 Bhaskar v. State of Karnataka ‘Transfer of Easement 280 Bhaskaran Nair v. Chellappan Nair Disturbances of Easement 282 ee eee a Bhavani Ramalakshmy v. State of Kerala Suspension of Easements, 2284 Ae a cans DOR En isle of Easements on 2d it Bhim Singhji v. Union of India. Licences 285 sthahilon Union af Bhim Singhji ». Union of India. Bhim Singhji v.Union of India 5 Bijilu Joseph v. Collector, Kottayam... Bishasnber Dayal Chandra Mohan v. State of U.P. Board of Revenue, Chepauk, Madras y. Venkataswami .. Caxona Shoe Co. Lid. v. Bhaskaran Nair 209CONTENTS Chacko Varghese v. The Tahsildar 2 seve 143 Chief Commissioner Delhi. Dianna Singh Sh 74 Chief Commissioner, Delhi v. Dhanna Singh sr Ghimar Lal Hargo bind Dass» Special Land Acquistion Oftcer98 Chimanlal v. Special LAO ene Chinnamma v. V. Gopalan Collector of Malabar v. Ibrahim Flajt Damodaran Nair v. Travancore Devaswom Board... i Damodaran Nair v. Travancore Devaswom Board 195 Daramu Naidu v, Carmasulu Company Ltd . Daripur Co-op Society v. State of Gujarat rcneennneennnnnnne 108 Deepak Pahuva v. Lt. Governor of Dethi Deepak Pahwa v. Lt. Governor of Delhi Deepak Pahwa v. Lt. Governor of Delhi Deputy Commissioner v: Durga Nath Sharma Devi and others v. State of Kerala. Dinanth Mahajan v, Collector Dropadi Devi v. Ram Das Duppa v. Mayo... Fatesang Gimba ¥. State Fatesang Gimba v, State Fernandez v. State Firm J.C. Pate & Co.v. M-P. State. Flawap vs. Metropolitan Railway Company Case 272 Forest Range Officer v. Mohammed Ali 223 Formento resorts v. Gustavo Ranato etc... 82 G.CDA. v. Mathew. wn 98 Ganga Dutt v. Kartik Chandra Das... 2 209 Ghee Dee Fankula v. District Collector, Ernakulam ccsnsnne 205 Girdharan Prasad Missir v. State of Bihar... SececeS, Godavari Sugar Mills v. S.B. Kamble 22 Gopal Innani \. State of Andhra Pradesh and others.. 123 Gopalakrishnan Nair v, Tahasildar... _—* 218 Gourikuity Amma V. TC. State conn? Govinda Pillai v. Govindapillai .. 22 Govinda Rao v. Dist. Collector... ses 139 Govindaru Namboothiripad and others v, State of Kerala. 19 Gulam Hussain Hyderi v. M. Gopal Swamy 207 State of U.P. ra 83 1 Kerala State Financial Enterprises sco 188 Tiles & Marbles Ltd. vs. Francis Victor Coutinho snes 93 Hindustan O.C. Ltd. v. Damodaran Namboodiri. 97 CONTENTS xl Hobson v. Corringe .. ee) Holland v. Hodgson : es 20 Holly Cross Church v. Tahsildar. m5 Hussain v, State of Kerala Aen 245 Ikkorakutty v. Hariharan Imperial Bank v. Bengal National Bank In State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh larsi Timber Merchants Association v. State Juan v. State of Kerala 107 duan v. State of Kerala. aes : ee] J.D. Pathak v. Banot ie BL Jilubhat v. State of Gujarat Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab Joseph v. Tahasildar 8. Wynad .. KD.HP. Co. v. State of Kerala. 237 KR. Joseph Vs. District Collector 183 Kaliyappan v. State of Kerala = = 88 Kameshwar v, State of Bihar .... = 2 Kanaran v. District Collector: 205 Kanta Goel v. B. P. Pathak sees 208 Kanthimathy Plantation, (P) Lid. v. State of Kerala vs.cavvcscvonine 75 Kanubhai Sankalchoand Patel v. Nayankunj Co-operative Housing Society Lid., Ahmedabad. 126 Karimbil Kunhikannan v. State of Kerala... oe Kerala Fisheries Corporation Lid. v. PS. John and others. 189 Kerala Nature Preservation Society, Trissur v. Professor, Livestock Research Centre and others x gael Kesavanand Bharti v. State of Kerala Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala Keshavanada v. State of Kerala Khorshed Shapoor Chenai v. Asst. Controller of Estate Duty Kochu Mathew Mathai and another v State of Kerala and another: Kochunarayanan v. Janaki Amma Kochunarayanan v. Janaki Amma Kochunni K.K. v. State of Madras Kolappa Pillai v. Swarnamma Pillai Koligiri Venkataramerhyanier v. Palibanda Basayya Krishi Uspadan Mandi Samiti v. Ratan Prakash Mangal Krishi Unpadan Mandi Samiti. Ratag Prakash Magal Krishna Iyer v. Murphy Estates Ltd. Krishna Pillai v. StarexIV CONTENTS Krishna Rediy v. Special Dy. Collector. Krishnan Nair v. Lakshmi Amma Kuruvila Yohannan v. Kumaran and another LAD Vijayawada Thermal Station v. Venkata Rao Land Acquisition Collector » Durga Pada Mutherjo Leigh v, TaylOr svn ‘ Mahadeo Singh v. Maharashtra State Electricity Supply Cov. Thane Electric Supply Co. Majeed ¥. State , Malankara Rubber and Produce Co. . State of Kerala. Mandal Gopalan v. Rohini Maneka Gandhi v.Union of India Manubhai Jahtalal Patel v, State of Gujarat Mariam v, Tahasildar... Marshall v. Green. ‘Mary Beena John & another v. Addl. District Court and other. Mathai Thomas \. State of Kerala Mathai v, Tahasildar Mathai w: Tahasildar: Maung Kan v. Mauag Po Tok. Mehierao Saheb Shri Bhin Singhji Annata Lakshmi Pattabhai Ramasharma Yeturi x. Union of India 129 Mehta Ravindrarat Ajitrat v. State of Gujarat Mohammad Ibrahim v, N.CE. Trading Company... Mohammad Ibrahim v. Northem Circars Fibre Trading Co. Mohammed Ali v. Forest Range Officer 222 Mohammed v. Board of Revenu _ BT Mohan Lal Hargovind IT. Commission. 29 Munjusree Plantations lid. Vat of Tamil Nad. 4d Nachiouthu v. State wc 143 Naibahu ». Lata Ram Narayan _ 206 Nanappan Konthi v. District Collector... coven LOH Nanappan Konthi x District Collector sete 108 Nanappan Konthi v District Collector sn. 75 Nanappan Konthi v. District Collector 81 Natarajan v. State vv afro P43, Nedungadi Bank Lid. v Tahasitdar, Ontapalam 190 Neelakanian y. District Collector. 143 New Kerala Chits and Traders v. Ajit Gangadhar Shanbhag voc 188 CONTENTS ~~ Omega Tyre Retreading Co. v. Sales Tax Officer. Perumal v. Ramaswami.. 3 Perumal x. Ramaswar Philip v. Skaria R.Deshpande v, Muttam Reddy. Ra Jiwan v. Hanuman Prasad. Rajendra Singh v. Uttar Pradesh Rajeshwari Devi v. Rabi Ram Chander Darak v. Ganesh Das Rathi Ram Lal Mangathu Ravi v. Piercuand & others . Ramachandra Nago Patil v. Asst. Collector . Ramkrishnaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh. Rashtriya Mill Macdoor Sangh VState of Maharashira Reshma Finance Corporation v. DEO ne Rey. Fr. Alexander v, State of Kerala .. Reynolds v. Ashby & Sons S.M.G Chetty v. Ganeshan Salim v. District Judge... Santabai v. State of Bombay... Santhosh Kumar v. Central Warehousing Corporation Sasidharan . District Collector. Savithry Amma v. State of Kerala ‘Schedule Caste Co-Land Owning Society v. Secretary of State v. Ashtamurthi 0. Secretary of State v. Vira Rajan ‘Shanti Devi v. Competent Authority ‘Singarani Collaries Co.Ltd. v. Vinod Chandra. ital Charadra v. Dotaum Sri Venkateshwara Swamy Rao Devesthariam vs. Vedanda Kanakalakshmi 23 Srinivasa Raghavachar HS. VState of Karnataka 41 Standard Cashew Industries v. Krishnan 206 ‘State of Gujarat v. Bhogilal Keshavial 82 State of Gujarat v. Inderji. 105 State of Gujarat v. Kamalaben Jeevanbheai 39 State of Gujarat v. Panch of Nani Hamam’s Pole. " 74 State of Gujarat ¥. Panja Bhat Nath L7p State of Gujarat v. Patel Narambhai Nathubai 81 State of Gujrat v. Patel Narambhai Nathubat 00. 74 State of Haryana v. Chanan Male, 21 State of Kerala v. Gwalior Rayon Silk Co. Lid — 2 State of Kerala v. Kunjikader ... 143xv CONTENTS State of Kerala v. Kuttan Panickar. State of Maharashtra \.Chandrabhan State of Punjab v. Guradial Singh. State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh State of Tamil Nadu v. L. Abu Kavur Bai . s 4a 229 State of U.P. v. Pista DeVi sinmn eS State of U.P. v. Radhey Shyam Nigam. 80 State of U.P. v. Radhey Shyam Nigam ar ‘State v. Gopalan ge 208 qfgbramaniam Chentiar v. M. Chidambaram Serva 31 Majrramonia Iyer v Joseph Georg 51 MM, dhakaran Pillai v, Kadija Bee esi 218 pukumara Pillai » Vasu Pillai sevens 208: Muhasildar ». Thomas... = 200 mithasildar v. Thomas 201 ildar Kanayannur v. Lucy Eapen 137 Thakorbhai Dajibhai Disai v. State of Gujarat... a a 123, Thakurani Dasi.v. Bisweswar Mukherjt 2 Thangammal ». Murugammal 26 Thomas v. State of Kerala 107 Thomas v. State of Kerala... Thomas v. State of Kerala Union of India v. Abdul Jalit.. Union of India v. Chopra K.K Vajravelu v. Special Deputy Collector Vajravelu v. Special Duty Collector Vareed John v. Dy. Collector. isa maga Varghese Joseph. State of Kerala stint 299) Varkey Abraham v, District Judge 241 Varkey v. Narayanan 4 Vidhyadharan v. Stat ones 24S WB. v. Surendra Natl 104 Waman Rao v. Union of India a a INTRODUCTION Since the main occupation of man in ancient society, was agriculture, a basic n existed between man and land even in the ancient society. This relation of men with the land originated and developed in societies in different ways, based on the custom, culture and traditions of each society. ‘The proprietary ‘ight in land’ gets its origin from Manu's ‘Occupation ‘Theory’, according to w ngs which are not already the subject of property become the property of the fiist occupand) This theory is the Indian counterpart of the Roman Doctrine of “occupation” which provides that wild beasts, birds, fish, and all animals which live either in the sea, the air, or ‘an the earth, so soon as they are taken by anyone immediately become, by of nations, the property of the captor, that which had no previous ‘According toManu’s Occupation Theory "A ficld is his who clears gle, game is his who has first pierced it". Judges under the Khalifa n-al-Rashid like Abu Mohammed and Abu Yusuf observed that "waste lands are a sort of common goods and become the property of the cultivator by virtue of his being the first possessor, in the same manner as in the case of seizing game or gathering firewood" >. According to them in order 10 convert the caltivator of land to its owner, permission of the state ig not needed. His view is that oceupancy ripens into ownership because claimant to the object and because all things were assumed tobe somebody's property" Diamond has castigated Henry Maine by saying that the conceptions of ownership and possession are essentially the conception of nature system of law and ca to early times.* THE HINDU PERIOD ‘The Hindu sages and jurists are of the view proprietor of the soil. A share of the ben subject was to be given to the sovere at sovereign was not the its of the land occupied by the as the price for the protection Kton's He Henry M: 3, (Gray's ed) 610, 16, Ancient Lan, 208 (1931- Wid Classic's Services) tive Law, 2602 (1935)2: LAND LAWS IN KERALA afforded to the life, property and liberty of the subject. Narada specified the share as one sixth of the produce.* Regarding the right ofthe King to give away the property Sayana Swamy said : "Phe king cannot make gi entitled only to a share of the produce by to his subjects”. Sayana also supported sovereignty lies only in punishing the wicked ans red_does not pass on to property’. ui Dasi. v. Bisweswar Mukherj? ‘e Secretary of State v. Vira Rajan'® During this period, ct of, Isory and even penal ‘and by Madras High Cou: and Secretary of State v! A: found that every owner her by gift or by sal ‘THE MUSLIM PERIOD According to Mohammedan theory the Sovereign was supposed to be the orig ‘or of the land so long a8 he received a share of the produce. But when his shaie was eoimmitied ino a fixéd. money rat does a The chief difference between Hind a nd revenue. I former share was-1/6ih.of the produce, whereas in the 6 1/3rd of the gross produce. Aurengazeb increased, to Zend of the gross produce. INTRODUCTION 3 When anarchy existed in the period between the decline of Mughal tendeney for the growth of semi- ages came to look tipon more and more powerful owners of those villages and proprietary rights were given to the FEUDAL SYSTEM = far removed from one another in time and place, such as -2160 B.C.) after the Old Kingdom in Egypt and to the Chou period in China (1122-250 B.C.) But gen ied to society in Furope from the tenants who paid rent. In between these two ol hierarchy of intermediary lords. This system of landlord-tenant relationship existed in almost all countries, Due to the industrial revolution this system began to disintegrate, FEUDAL SYSTEM IN KERALA.,4 LAND LAWS IN KERALA temple inscriptions form the 9th to 13th centuries A.D, say that it was non Brahmins who had gifted property to temple. From non Brahmins the ownership of land passed to upper caste Brahmins. This transfership from from the 9thto 13th century ind was owned by non- ‘Villavas and other age class of Tand holders in the period from ‘The properties thus transferred were administered by Namboodirie His catia Bealenlg sho Sectnle of property Tihs promoted the large scale transfer of ge area of properties thus se, who were in charge of the temple irate was holding. Ownership on land gradually becaTaeTRE poly of the upper caste, mainly Namboodiries and Nairs. there established certain ferent classes of ownership of the During and a new Civil Service system were est way to a new set of salaried income group Many of these em hese developments gave we ‘Sirkar' employees. INTRODUCTION 5 serve the feudal lords and the failure to guide the common people to acorrect appreciation of the events and things. There was also mental slavery that resulted from the economic servitude. By the 12th century the temples were subjected to the irresponsible management of the trustees. The Chera-Chola war which lasted throughout century catalyzed this process of destruction of many temples. ime. It was. from that janmam right t Namboodiries who became jenmis adopted a policy of thus become ‘were certain customary rules and regi between the jenmi and the different classes of tenants. These gave the jenmi extensive power. Thus the Jenmi could interfere i and family affairs of all his tenants. By the 18th eration of the class of si were increasingly favourable for the \d holders. When land revenue was fe mostly Nayars who in course igthen the Jenmis to increase re sh Government time of the 12 year renewal of tenure. The Br of grant power to the Jenmis. Kerala's special ave all grown up around6 LAND LAWS IN KERALA LAND TENURE IN TRAVANCORE ‘The tenure which existed in Travancore may be classified under two heads of land, Jenmom lands and Sirkar lands. Sirkar lands were also called Pandaravaka’ lands ae Those were lands owned by local chieftains, Devaswom Brahmins ete ed tothe governmén ‘due, the jenmi will continue the charge ofthe property. This kind of is known as michavaram, The lands acquired by bi three. as jenmom lands are generally classified into (Jenmom lands: Which were completely exempt from payment of any kind of tax. INTRODUCTION 3 Gi Jenmom lands which were originally exempted from payme: tax but subsequently became liable to it under certain condi Iemainly consisted of the pure jenmom lands of the Brahmins and Devaswoms. ps Sai of any In Sirkar accounts these lands were included as Devaswom and Brahmaswom properties. These lands were exempted from tax. If these lands were transferred to those other than Devaswom or Brahmin Jer for money consider were transferred det \d as unfit for cultivation orf he di “government. In such a inal jenmui has to pay michavaran, Jenmom lands of which a tax was fixed as Rajabhogam from initial jure comes t0 an end, and then the #!. So Jenmom lands had a spe 1s because it was based on jenmont right we Was not in by himself. But he could create a number of attipper® etc: But most of the nthe merit of each case, But the problem of tenancy ing state intervention. Thus the Royal Proclamation on 866-67) was made. This proclamation protected the tenants evie landlords, Thus the tenants got a possessory increased by demai 1042 M.E. from arbi in Travancore, See Supra No.2: at P315, There were in such Adhikarams in Travancore 19. for tenants under kanam tenure 20, local chiets 21 2, 23. 24, an mortgage. 25, gust, 1867,8 LAND LAWS IN KERALA right over the property. Jenmi was not entitled to evict his tenant on the \expiry of the leases but he could readjust the rent. The condition for eviction ‘was payment of twelve years' rent. In this condition also, if the tenant made ‘any improvement on the land than that was properly compensated. ) Due tothe n expenses and delay of civil suits, it became difficult for the jenmies to recover the rents. So jenmies began to agitate against this proclamation and this led to the appointment of a Commission in 1060 M.E. (1884-'85). The Commission chiefly inquired about the relation between the | jenmi and the kudiyan. The tenancy especially that of kanapattom was, also considered by the Commission. Based on the report of the Commission ) the Travancore Jenmi Kudiyan Regulation of 1071* was enacted. This was the first regulation which established fixity of tenure. In this regulation the ” fight was also made heritable and transferable. ) A clear distinction between Malayalee Brahmin jenmis and Non- Malayalee Brahmin jenmis was made by the Act. In the case of Non ) Malayalee Brahmin Jenmi's the kudiyan did not get permanent right over the property. The jenmis could evict the tenants in the following grou ) non-payment of rent for twelve years, Gi) in the case of willful denial of the jenmi’s title, Gi) jul acts, of waste which permanently_affect the value and of the holding. In the absence of an express written contract, every lease was to be considered renewable in twelve years.” Ina ‘on to the normal rent’ the kudiyan must the time of renewal. These payments were c: olappanam™, churiparukanant, adukalakan m, alakkada®’ and opputusi® nv of 1071 issued on 3rd July, 1896, 27... Tid, $20 28. calculated on the basis of kanam consid 29, cial present for onam. 30. ost ofthe Cadjan (now stamp paper) oa venewal has to be aL 1 outset of every measureme 32 ‘of the house, 33 10,15 020 % of the kanam consideration, 34 INTRODUCTION 9 Moreover during the occasion of the six ceremonials called Adianthrams of the jenmi’s family, the kanamacar must pay some perquisites. This type of voluntary payment by tenants was considered as a symbol of his loyalty to the jenmi. In course of time it tured into a practice.” Depending on the change of holding there-had been variations in the quantum of kanam. If the property of the tenant happened to be a garden the jenmi could claim from him other types of profits called panchabhogams.* Some other kinds of tenancy relations also existed in the jenmom properties. They can be divided into five categories viz. (1) Orti (2) Outi and Kuzhikanam (3) Verum Pattom (4) Pattom and Kuzhikanam and (5) Aitiper. 1. Otti : Itis the money received by the jenmi as security of land from the kudiyan ot tenant. The kudiyan would enjoy the produce from the. and. It is almost like anusufructuary mortgage. 2. Ott and Kuzhikanam : - It is a kind of mortgage made with an agreement to the effect that the kudiyan will make improvements in the land, 3. Verumpattom :- Itis a kind of transact hout money consideration, by which the kudiyan took the possession of the property, by paying an annual rent. The Kudiyan was bound to lease out the land on the expiry of the term, 4. Pattom and Kuzhikanam :- This is a type of lease Thade without money consideration wherein the tenant had the right to make improvements on the land and he had to pay a nominal land tax. The tenant has the right to get compensation from the jermy for the improvements he had made. 5. Attipper : - This is a kind of complete sale of the land by jenmi, by Which right of the property was transferred through a series of procedut As a first step jenmi had to execute a ‘Kaippada Out by receiving full 36. _Tewas fees for signing ike.10 value of the property as debt. Finally by exe right of eviction was also taken away. Due to this Regulat LAND LAWS IN KERALA 12 Attipper the purchaser e Travancore Jenmi Kadiyan jon 1108 M.B.°was passed to amend the Travancore fon of 1071. This Regulation abolished all customary of the jenmi was reduced to the extent of receiving ikaram was Jenmi’s large scale eviction. Hol enactme: f For the purpose of checking unauthorized evi social circumstances which prevailed Trav ‘exempted certain lands Jands, Kundukris! jons the Travancore ing (Stay of Exect sed. But this mn Proceeding) Act 1124" was not effective in checking core Holding (Stay of Execution Proceedings) Act 124° .¢ Government lands, Devaswom lands, Sreepadam lands etc. from the purview of the Act. Thro ight of occupancy in Kudikidap Kuddikidappukarn’s interest in the kudikidappu was declared heritable but not alienable*. is are lands owned by the Sirkar (Government). These lands are also called Pandaravagi Trthis kind of the land tenant had absolute [Nagam Aiya- deals with 20 types of minor tenures. ‘of Execution Proceedings) A March, 1949. xy of Execution Proceeding) As ‘A process by which the mortgage a 4, passed on 6th INTRODUCTION u ownership of the property if he had paid all government dues. (Fhe lands tinder Sree Padmanabha Swami Temple in Thiravananthapuram was known ‘as-Sripandaravagi lands) In both Padaravagi lands and Sree Pandaravagi ands the Tand tenure was similar. They were = (G7 npartom or Sirkarpatiom lands nhs typeof lands tenants had absolute Fights in theit holdings. This was the most prevalent tenure in ‘Travancore area. Here the tenant cam transfer or sell the property. Wy Ruttagapati e ands '- Government eased out this land tothe tenant ‘was the owner of this land. type of land, tenants had_no tight over shey were mere tenants at will, the lands on behalf of the sovereign. The tax payable was ge higher than the ordinary assessment on Sirkar lands because tenants were supplied with seeds, labourer's wages and cattle, But tenant used fo sustain half of the gross produce, after deducting the usual Sirkar dues. “y) - Otti is a kind of mortgage in which the Sirkar imorigager and the tenant stands asthe mortgagee, The tans byeither actual or constiuctive debt by the state. “O) Vir transfer of land as a reward for U service to the c ied Viruthi. The holder of Viruthi called vi was to render military service. is practice was stopped and service was ordaved fo be given to Devaswoms. All kinds of alienation of virushi by fruthiars have be cancelled by Viruthi proclamation of 1061 M.E. During ier periods Viruthi holders were subjected to many exploitation by various government offi 1063 MLE, (1887-'88) a rule was passed for freeing the Virut i) Inams sovereign or big jenm or as wimark of Roy: alienable. mm was a practice of making grants of lands by the for some service renclered to the stale or sovereign favour, Inam was considered as heritable but not In 2nd June, 1865 Pattom Proclam which the(tenant under Pandarap Patioms were declared alienable and heritabl rights were also conferred on the tenants and itis considered as ted to resume these lands2 LAND LAWS IN KERALA from the occupants, market value of the a thereon had to be paid by the Sirkar t Pandarapatiom were issued ind_and cost of improvements (0 the occupants, The tenant under with pastayams (certificate of purchase) through Travancore Revenue Settlement Proclamation Act of 1886 Afterwards these tands were called Pandaraval ka lands a was replaced by money payments in kind Later on in the place of Pandarapattom lands some other types of lands were held by Government which included poromboke lands and Tharisu lands (uncultivated lands.) Subsequently these poromboke lands were given to people as kuthakapatiom as per the Kuthakapattom Rules of 1947 and harisu lands were distributed among landless poor under the Kerala Land. Assignment Rules 1964. LAND TENURE IN COCHIN AND MALABAR. The land tenure in Cochin can be Pandaravaka (land belonging to state) (2) of the jenmis). Pandaravaka lands were hi tenures,** ided into two categories (1) Puravaka (Private properties weld under various subsidiary ‘The king was the head of the state and he had lands for his maintenance. naduvazhis. Nadu was divided into Desams and were ruled by Desavazhies. ted and the jenmom right ‘Travancore tenancy, the lands ased out for rendering mainly military service to the King and fs. The intermediaries were mos r tly Nayars. The normal lease was called Verumpatiom which was redeemable at the pleasire of King or Chiat fe — ng the second half of 18th century land tenures in Cochin lost. of their military character. Land was mai Verumpatiom would be taken for a year. Tent, possession was allowed to him. BuyBsH —— KRIS h compensation for improvements if they were, i consent oF their landlonls, "Gq A] AS SJ \ Verumpattom becamSa/Kan ogee i ie ET Tk ip aridistorbed poavession. for his life.time, but later jon was fixed for twelve years. At the end of the period ou Henin, the kanamdar could be evicted after paying the kanam Satie = a = of the improvements. But the usual pra ‘was to allow rene accepting renewal fee. Cochin also to improve the soil. TI ed fuakikanam inne The lease, was not for twelve years. Particular feature of his tenures that the tenant will not make any advance (0 the j goa toe Nas systemati payment of rent. Atte end ofthe period, compensation payable to the tenants for improvements would be assessed and charge on the property and the tenant became a Kanamdar. ae Ina ox anubhogams was another kindof tenure which prevailed inthis aa, Itwas a type of permanent lease granted to different people for service rendered by them. The name of deg asso sts caste and status of the grantee”. oa it lortgage with or without possession of xd to compensation for improvements nor Panayam was a kind of simpl advanced by the t Jarge that rent was e: = of tenure amt was having ght to pre-tiption te, Jenmi wished dispose of the land. As the condition of various ter compelled to act for their uph snoney from iy created bythe enn, by borrowing money ny expen Se. C. Achatha Menon, Supa 47 . toa nonbrahmin, mati brahsworn. Ia given “Aho Geong a2 cate which ls superar we grater wax Known os auboga, is infor to that of graner was ealed 50,4 LAND LAWS 21 KERALA ‘Travancore and Malabar di aba directly influenced Coch ; “nse nd Mal inten legisla enute legislation of Cochin was the Settlement Proclamation of 1905"', which conferred full rred fal proprietary rights on the tenant Pandaravaka Verumpation'aias ee In 1908 a Commission under the presidentshi ree residentship of Mr. S. Locke was snp stay and ep the conto a elaonnp the enn sat iyans under different types of tenures and the Cochin Tenancy Act was enacted on the basis of the report of the Commissi ane: ante finiy of tenure to those leases which were registered Deore 1886 -gister: re 1886, ‘The Act also provided rovided that tenants were entil ingot eae ‘S were entitled to compensation for The Cochin Tenancy Act of 1938” brought Ss aml mn 8 brought unde: bi ri it kanan registered between 1885 and 1915. Cochin Tenancy Act of 1938 was definition of kanam. ra n panayams in the i 5 : This Act which was passed in 1943 conferred fixity of tenure in respect 3 ferred fixity of tenure i Of the holdings of verumpattomdars. The Act conferred security of tenure on all leases and subies Verumpatiomdars can be evicted on cer oS aiSectte wat eae oF pattom, wilful denial of the title of the jenn in grounds, like non-payment of i allowing te an jaste land etc, $.2(a) of the Act defines ki cfteaeptake en aan fansleapces who bas been permitted i ited to have the use and oo : ; cupation of a portion of rope rtp feetng exw oranda 1p entforthe se l eruption teste ao given”. Audie considered as tenants through this Act 1947 stayed tel iled against the hudkidppukarsforevictons MAI R In Malabar Area the la v 1e presence ind tenure was ver : : as very complex due to the presence ies acting between original jenmi and actual cull “Ths tie bis ire ores which prevailed in (b) kanam.and (c) The ac hich is ae We Ci fenmoen mpattom.®. The government treater der ¢ jenmom tenure asthe soe legal propristor of land. Kanamtanute i aon eg . Kana tre was alos SL. Issued on 10th March, 1905. = 3 passed on 6th Makaram 113. 1951) Chapter VPP. 597-619. INTRODUCTION uF tike_a mostgage wherein the holder of kanam, known as Kanakkars teased or mortgaged land from the jenmi on paymentof a lump. Sum (kanamn) ant annlal rent. Originally the kanam tenure was never! subjected to eviction by the jenmi. But British Civil courts held that kanam tenure hhad to be oe nro at the expiry of every twelve years and this helped jenmies to veer thelr tenants at the expiry of the lease. In the middle of 19th century Kanakkar who subleased the propery charged nigher rent feom their lenanfs. Thus there was concentration of Tand itrthe Fands of a few families of kanakkars in Malabar. They becsme jenmies of land, soalso land was concentrated atthe hands of the intermediary vanakkers. Both jenmies and intermediary Kanakkars, were known 8 jenmithampuran. This intermediary Kanakkars, first time raised the voice for fixity of tenure. In the middle of the 19th century there were large scale outrages in Malabar popularly known as the "mapila outrages”. The basic iste behind this outrages was said to be the disturbances in the tenancy relationship, ee eee a ‘Duc to this agrarian discontent, William Logan, a former Collector of Malabar was then appointed as the Special Commissioner fo endive into ‘and report upon the general question of tenure of land and the: tenancy rights in Malabar. Logan found that the cultivators ‘were rapidly degenerating in vr alnbar into « state of insolvency because of very high renewal fees and inadequate,compensation for improvements, William Logan proposed that government should pass a legislation in favour of the actual cultivators of the land. Kanakkars were against the proposal of giving, fixity of tenure to their tenants, but were demanding fixity ee penure for them, (The Board of Revenue disapproved the Logan's proposals. The Board took the view that the jenmies position as the ubsolute aoe of land was a settled fact and that the kanakkars would mot Be rea the finty of tenure, only because they were investors of money. he Board af Revenue stood for the reconciliation between the interests of jenmies and kanakkars. For the purpose of studying Logan's proposal and to advise the govemment ‘special commission was appointed by the Government. But this Commission Ace iw Tavour of kanakkar. This special Commission's proposal to give permanent occupancy right (0 kanakkar was rejected by Madras High Fa. See KIN. Panikkar “Agrarian LegiMution in Malabar” PP 36-38.18 LAND LAWS IN KERALA enacted and sections 4 to 7 of the Act stayed the eviction of all types of tenants and Audlikidappukars. Restoration of possession was also available to them if deprived of possession. ‘The first elected Ministry of Kerala gave priority to land reforms. The was introduced in 1957 which was passed in 1959. ‘As far as Cochin and Malabar are concemed there was no uniform law regarding payment of compensation to the tenants for the improvements, they have made on the land at the time of eviction. The Kerala Compensation for Tenants Improvement Act 1958” was passed to provide uniform benefits throughout Kerala, ‘The Jenmi-Kudiyan Act of 1071 M.E. was repealed by Jenmikaram Payment (Abolition) Act of 1961. The tenants under the Janmi-Kudiyan Act were conferred full proprietary rights over the holdings. The rights, interests and claims of the Pattazhi Devi Temple® over the vast area of lands belonging to the Temple were abolished through the Pattazhi Devaswom, Lands (Vesting and Enfranchisement) Act, 1961 and. the tenants were provided with full proprictary rights over the lands of the Temple. In the 1957 general elections to the Kerala Legislative Assembly the Communist Party got majority. The slogan "land to the tiller" was at a high peak at that time. The Communist party which was in the front line of all agrarian movements, took it as a challenge to bring a comprehensive land reform legislation. On 21st December 1957 the Revenue Minister Mrs. K.R. Gowri introduced the Agrarian Relation Bill in the Kerala Legislative Assembly. By drafting the Bill, the government have kept in view the bréad objectives of land reforms as laid down by the Planning Commission® and the basic aims of the Kerala Agrarian Relation Act. ‘The Bill gave protecti n for kudikidappukars, tenancy protection restriction on ownership of lands in excess of ceiling limits, right of cultivating tenants to purchase the landlord's rights. The Bill also provides for the constitution of Land Tribunal and Land Board. 59 Act XXXIX of 1958. The Temple is is and put cel fie cultivation and 62, Act 4 of 1961 INTRODUCTION 19 “The Bill which was passed in 1959 was sent for the assent of the President. But before getting the assent of the President the Assembly was dissolved. ‘The President sent back the Bill by suggesting certain amendments. After mid term election new Government passed the Agrarian Relation Bill in October, 1960. President gave his assent to the Bill on 21st January 1961 and the Act was brought into force on the 15th of February 1961. ‘The Kerala Agra In Karimbit Kunhikannan ¥. State of Kerala® the Supreme Court found that the act was unconstijutional in its application to the Ryotwari lands of Hosdurg and Kasargod taluks, as the Act was violative of Article 14 of the constitution .n Relation Act was challenged before the courts. For the protection of the tenants of the taluks of Cannanore district from eviction the Government of Kerala enacted the Kerala Ryotwari Tenants and Kudikidappukars Protection Act of 1962. In Govindaru Namboothiripad and others v. State of Kerala® the Kerala High Court declared that the Act was null and void in its application to the Ryotwari lands of Malabar area and to the lands held under Kandukrishi, Thiruppuvaram, Pandaravaka Sripandaravaka and also some other tenures of Travancore atea. Due to this decision the Act was made ineffective and there was large seale evictions by the landlords. In order to overcome this situation the Kerala Tenants and Kudikidappukars protection Act 1963 was enacted and the operation of the Agrarian Relation Act of 1961 was suspended. Next step for the protection of tenants was the Kerala land Reforms ‘Act 1963. Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 presents. the picture of a legislation which incorporates revolutionary ideas in its provisions. The vested interest groups resisted the implementation of its various provisions. The ‘main resistance is through fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. The Act has become a shield against adverse court decisions by which it has been included in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution. ‘The amendment to the Land Reforms Act 1963, brought in 1969 gives ete os Tew itr eee sete a 63, AUR. 1962 S.C. 723. 64. Act XVIML of 1962. 65. 1962 K.L.T. 913. 66, Act | of 1964