Two contentions are raised by the revision petitioners in this Civil Revision Petition. One is regarding the inclusion of 22.5 cents in Survey No.16/1. The petitioners contend that the said extent was acquired for the Malampuzha canal. There is no dispute to the fact that the said extent was so acquired for the canal. But the Award by the Land Acquisition Officer is dated 30.11.1979 only. This implies that the family of the declarant was in possession of the said extent on 1.1.1970. The Taluk Land Board has not erred in including the extent of 22.5 cents in the account of the declarant. 2. The other contention raised is regarding the inclusion of 7.17 acres owned by the wife of the declarant. The contention is that the property was acquired by the proceeds of the sale of a Thavazhi property. The property will enure to the family even if the contention of the petitioners is upheld. The Taluk Land Board has included only 4.78 acres out of 7.17 acres in the account of the declarant. That cannot CRP (LR) No.781 of 2013 2 in any way said to be erroneous warranting interference in this revisional jurisdiction. The ceiling area has been reckoned with reference to Section 82(2) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963.
3. The revision petitioners make a fervent plea to file an option statement. Such an option statement can be entertained if only the lands have not hitherto been assumed possession of. The revision petitioners are given time till 30.11.2014 to file an option statement. The Taluk Land Board shall consider whether the said statement can be accepted and identity of excess lands finalised.
The Civil Revision Petition (Land Reforms) fails, dismissed.
Sd/-
V.CHITAMBARESH, Judge.
nj.