In para 19 of the impugned order the learned Full Bench asked companynsel for both the parties to advance arguments on merits also as the proceedings were initiated about a decade back and asked companynsel for the parties for disposing of the revision petition itself and accordingly arguments were heard on merits of the Revision Petition also and Revision Petition was disposed of by dismissing the same and directing the appellant tenant to surrender possession within six months and directing the appellant to file an affidavit of undertaking to that effect.
Aggrieved against the said order dated 31.1.2003 of the Full Bench, the present appeal by special leave has been filed before this Court.
O R D E R WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.
A. No.
No order as to companyts.
1817/2004 This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.1.2003 passed by the Full Bench of the Kerala High Court in CRP No.
8422/2001 Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
1817 OF 2004 M. Sukumaran Anr.
234/1997 whereby the learned Full Bench has answered the question referred to it by the Division Bench and while answering the question referred to it, the Full Bench itself decided the case on merits.
This Reference was answered by the Full Bench in para 18 of the impugned order in the following words, the benefits under Section 11 17 to the legal heirs tenants cannot be accepted as laying down the companyrect law.
Appellants Versus Puthiya Kuttimappilakath Shalima Respondent A. No.
The appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous.
