The order of the Land Tribunal, Wadakkanchery in O.A. No.1642 of 1976 was pursuant to an application filed in Form J. No appeal would lie from such order passed under Section 72MM of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act'). The remedy of the revision petitioner and respondents 4 and 5 was to make a motion under Section 72 MM(7) of the Act. It is of course true that an appeal would lie from any order passed on motion made under Section 72MM(7) of the Act. 2. The Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Thrissur also erred in dismissing the application filed for leave to appeal. No leave to appeal is necessary in view of the plain and unambiguous language of C.R.P. (LR). No. 741 of 2013 2 Section 102 of the Act. Any person aggrieved by the order of the land tribunal can maintain an appeal before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Thrissur. It is of course for the appellate authority to decide whether the appellants therein is prejudiced by the order of the land tribunal.
3. I set aside the impugned order of the appellate authority in A.A.No. 5 of 2013 on the file of the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Thrissur. The revision petitioner is at liberty to move under Section 72MM(7) of the Act within a period of 60 days from today. Any such motion shall be dealt with by the land tribunal with notice to the parties interested.
4. Respondents 1 to 3 contended that the right of the revision petitioner is already concluded in O.S.No.79 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, C.R.P. (LR). No. 741 of 2013 3 Thrissur. The revision petitioner alertly pointed out that an appeal suit is being filed against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.79 of 2004. It is up to the revision petitioner to pursue the appeal suit, if any, filed against O.S. No.79 of 2001 for which no directions are required at present.
This civil revision petition is disposed of. No costs.
AMV/20/10/ Sd/- (V.CHITAMBARESH, JUDGE) /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE