Judgment :- 1. When it comes to a question of faith or wealth, often it is the latter which is preferred. In this case also, what has happened is the same. The petitioner land-owner and the 1st respondent kudikidappukaran, both Christians, are trying their level best to get rid of a 'kurisupura' (chapel) situated in the property. Admittedly, the 'kurisupura' is in existence for the last few years and neither the respondent kudikidappukaran who is close by nor the petitioner landowner who is living a few miles away, did object or protest. Going by the facts revealed in the case, a good number of people are offering prayers in the 'kurisupura'. It is also in evidence that the respondent kudikidappukaran is a member of the St. Mary's Sadhu Jana Sangam which claims the 'kurisupura'. 2. The 1st respondent, Thomas, filed O.A. No. 2343 of 1975 before the Special Tahsildar (LR), Vypeen under S.80B of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, I of 1964, for short the Act, for purchase of kudikidappu. The Special Revenue Inspector deputed by the Land Tribunal by his report dated 21-7-1976 sought instructions from the Land Tribunal whether the 'kurisupura' situated near the 1st respondent's but should not be included in the 10 cents to be demarcated as his kudikidappu to be purchased by him. The 1st respondent filed an objection before the Land Tribunal on 16-8-1976 contending that the 'kuri-supura' should not be included in the 10 cents to be set apart for him. But the Land Tribunal by its order dated 16-8-1976 rejected that objection and allowed the purchase of 10 cents including the 'kurisupura'. It is seen from the order of the Land Tribunal that the decision was taken on the basis of an admission made by the 1st respondent in open court that the 'kurisupura' may also be included in the 10 cents to be demarcated as his kudikidappu. The kudikidappukaran challenged the above order of the Land Tribunal before the Appellate Authority (Land Reforms), Ernakulam. The Appellate Authority did not agree with the conclusions of the Land Tribunal and allowed the appeal permitting the kudikidappukaran to purchase 10 cents excluding the 'kurisupura' and its premises. It is the above judgment of the Appellate Authority that is challenged by the land-owner in this Civil Revision Petition. 3. The St. The Appellate Authority did not agree with the conclusions of the Land Tribunal and allowed the appeal permitting the kudikidappukaran to purchase 10 cents excluding the 'kurisupura' and its premises. It is the above judgment of the Appellate Authority that is challenged by the land-owner in this Civil Revision Petition. 3. The St. Mary's Sadhu Jana Samajam, Palluruthy who is the 3rd respondent in the O. A., filed O.A. No. 2116 of 1972 before the very same Land Tribunal for purchasing 10 cents wherein the 'kurisupura' is situate claiming kudikidappu. But that application was dismissed on the ground that no kudikidappu can be claimed in respect of a chapel. The evidence in this case is that the Sangam is in possession of the 'kurisupura' and its premises though there is nothing in evidence to show that the petitioner land owner gave any permission to put up the 'kurisupura'. It is also in evidence that a good number of persons offer their prayers in this 'kurisupura' though there are other chapels also in the neighbourhood. 4. S.80A of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, I of 1964 reads: "80A. Right of kudikidappukaran to purchase his kudikidappu (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any law for the time being in force, a kudikidappukaran shall, subject to the provisions of this section, have the right to purchase the kudikidappu occupied by him and lands adjoining thereto. (6) No kudikidappukaran shall be entitled to purchase any land which is not in the lawful possession of the person who holds the land in which the kudikidappu is situate or which is not within the boundaries of such land. (7) ..................... ..................... (12) For the purposes of this section, (a) (b) (c) in deciding the extent of land available for purchase by the kudikidappukaran or kudikidappukars, (i) (ii) the sites of the buildings and other structures situate on the land shall be excluded." Under S.80A of the Act, a kudikidappukaran is entitled to purchase the kudikidappu occupied by him. In this case, the kudikidappukaran is entitled to purchase 10 cents. Under S.80A(6) of the Act, no question of purchase of land not in the lawful possession of the land-owner arises. As per S.80A (12), sites of buildings and other structures situate on the land should be excluded from the land to be demarcated to the kudikidappukaran. In this case, the kudikidappukaran is entitled to purchase 10 cents. Under S.80A(6) of the Act, no question of purchase of land not in the lawful possession of the land-owner arises. As per S.80A (12), sites of buildings and other structures situate on the land should be excluded from the land to be demarcated to the kudikidappukaran. In this case, though 10 cents can conveniently be demarcated including the 'kuris-upura' and its premises, in view of the express provision contained in subsection (12)(c)(ii) of S.80A of the Act the kudikidappukaran has to be given 10 cents excluding the 'kurisupura' and its premises. The admission alleged to have been made by the kudikidappukaran before the Land Tribunal cannot stand in the way especially in view of the fact that he filed a written objection before the Land Tribunal that the 'kurisupura' and its premises should not be included in the 10 cents to be demarcated. In this view of the matter, there is nothing wrong and illegal in the judgment of the Appellate Authority challenged in the Civil Revision Petition. Not only that, no interference is possible under S.103 of the Act also. 5. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. Dismissed.