A 17 dated 24 12 1968 to this effect made by the Collector of the district under the Kerala Escheats and Forfeitures Act, 1964 had become final under the Act, there having been numberappeal under Section 7 or any suit in accordance with Section 11 of the Act by defendants appellants against the order Ex.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VERMA, J This appeal by special leave is against the judgment of the Kerala High Court dated 21 3 1990 in AS No.
The defendants also claimed to have acquired title through one S. Krishnan who had obtained a lease Ex.
It was thereafter that the decision of the Collector Ex.
The trial companyrt had dismissed the original suit filed by the State of Kerala From the Judgment and Order dated March 21, 1990 of the Kerala High Court in Appeal suit No.
According to the plaintiff State of Kerala, the suit lands came to be assigned by their original owner to one Antoon Lopez while there was a transfer also to M s Leckie Co. M s Leckie Co. in order to avoid any possible dispute of title made a purchase also from Antoon Lopez.
A 1 7 made by the Collector.
B 2 dated 11 5 1921 in favour of United India Lumbering Pvt.
The suit was resisted by the defendants appellants claiming title in these lands and denying the claim of escheat.
A 10 dated 26 4 1965 to which erratum Ex.
Escheat proceedings were initiated by issue of Ex.
A 17 dated 24 12 1968 was made holding that the suit lands had escheated to the State Government of Kerala.
The only challenge made by the appellants in the writ petitions was to the validity of the escheat order on the ground that the proceedings having been started under the Madras Endowments and Escheats Regulations, 1817 it companyld number be companytinued under the Kerala Escheats and Forfeitures Act, 1964.
On this basis the suit for recovery of possession of these lands was filed against the defendants appellants who were in unlawful possession of the same.
In short, the claim of the plaintiff State of Kerala is that these lands had escheated and belong to the State of Kerala and order Ex.
Ltd. Co. which went into liquidation and the properties thereof were then purchased by M. Cherian Pothen who then transferred the same in the manner indicated to enable defendants to acquire title to the suit lands.
The appellants companytend that reversal of the trial companyrts decree by the High Court is without any justification.
The defendants appellants being in unauthorised possession of these lands a suit for recovery of possession was filed by the State of Kerala on I I 1 969.
214 of 1980 arising out of judgment and decree of the Subordinate Court, Kozhikode in OS No.
There was numberchallenge by the appellants in the writ petitions to the escheat order on the ground of jurisdiction or violation of rules of natural justice.
153 of 1972.
The defendants challenged the validity of the escheat proceedings and also companytended that identity of the suit lands did number match with those acquired by the documents Ex.
but the High Court has allowed the appeal of the State of Kerala.
Hence this further appeal by special leave by the defendants in the suit.
The subject matter of the suit is 4200 acres of land in Jenmakaran Tharakan.
A 37 filed by the defendant appellant.
Apparently Such lands then were available in abundance for such occupation.
A II was issued in view of the objection Ex.
214 of 1980.
Nothing was heard of Antoon Lopez after he sold his right to M s Leckie Co. while that companypany seems to have gone out of existence during the early years of the 20th century and had abandoned the lands near about 1910.
