Allowed

Vageeswari Amma v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jul 2014WP(C)/3546/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a direction to revenue authorities to accept land tax and effect mutation on their property in Kadakampally Village. The Court held that pending inquiries into falsification of records concerned other properties and did not bar the mutation of the petitioners held land.

What did the court decide?

The respondents 3 and 4 shall effect mutation of the petitioners property within thirty days of receipt of this judgment.

Vageeswari Amma Vs the State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JULY 2014/10TH ASHADHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 3546 of 2014 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. VAGEESWARI AMMA, AGED 80 YEARS, D/O.BHAGEERATHI AMMA, SREE BHAVAN, TC-17/410, POOJAPPURA P.O., SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY HER P/A. HOLDER, DR.ASHOK KUMAR, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.VAGEESWARI AMMA, KARMA, TC-17/411, POOJAPPURA P.O., SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM.

¶8

2. M/S.CONFIDENT PROJECT INDIA PVT. LTD, CONFIDENT HOUSE, 868/2, S.A.ROAD, VYTTILA, KOCHI-19, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRIECTOR, T.A.JOSEPH, AGED 51YRS, S/O.LATE ALEXANDER THERUVIPARAMBIL 33/2652D, THERUVIPARAMBIL HOUSE, VENNALA P.O., KOCHI-ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM-695 001.

¶13

3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM-695 001.

¶14

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KADAKAMPALLY, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM-695 001.

¶15

R1-R4 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No. 3546 of 2014 (P)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXT.P1.	TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 16/10/2012 ISSUED FROM KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXT.P2.	TRUE COPY OF THE PARTIION DEED DATED 4/9/1973 OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM SUB REGISTRY OFFIE.
EXT.P3.	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15/7/2008 IN WPC NO.10840/2007 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
EXT.4.	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B-16409/2006 DATED 27//6/2009 OF THE SUB COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXT.P5.	TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTFICATE DATED 23/11/2013.
EXT.P6.	TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 26/4/2012.
EXT.P7.	TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 26/4/2012.
EXT.P8.	TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1800/212 DATED 14/5/2012 OF SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXT.P9.	TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPPT DATED 18/11/2012 ISSUED FROM THE KADAKAMPALLY VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXT.P10.	TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A TO JUDGE

LSN

A.M.SHAFFIQUE,J.

W.P.C.No. 3546 OF 2014

¶27

Dated this the 01^st day of July, 2014

¶28

J U D G M E N T

¶29

-------------------

¶30

Petitioners have approached this Court seeking for

¶31

direction to the respondents 3 and 4 to receive land tax in respect of the property having extent of 1.48 acres in Survey No.1285/2 and 5.323 cents in Survey No.1285/2-1-1-2 of Kadakampally Village. The facts involved in the above case would disclose that the first petitioner having obtained title and possession in respect of 1 acre and 48 cents of land situated in Survey No.1285/2 of Kadakampally Village was paying tax in respect of the property up to 2013. The property devolved upon her as per partition deed dated 04.09.1972. There was certain complaints with respect of falsification of records in about 4½ acres of land situated in the same Village. This came to be enquired into by the Sub Collector, Thiruvananthapuram, which resulted in Ext.P4 order. After a detail consideration of the matter, the Sub Collector issued an order restraining the authorities from mutating or collecting tax in respect of certain properties including an extent of 24.500 cents in Survey No.1285 and belonging to the

¶32

W.P.C.No. 3546 OF 2014

¶33

¶34

Integrated Housing Developers Limited. All other lands were excluded from further proceedings. First petitioner was the 9^th complaint in the proceedings, which resulted in Ext.P4.

¶35

Subsequent to Ext.P4, first petitioner was remitting tax as well. But when the second petitioner assigned the property to the 5^th respondent and thereafter approached the revenue authorities, they did not effect mutation of the property in favour of the second respondent, which resulted in the petitioner approaching this Court.

¶36

Learned Government Pleader on instructions would submit that falsification of documents including Thandaper Register related to a larger extent of property, which came to be enquired by the Sub Collector and since the enquiry was pending, there was a ban in receiving tax or effecting mutation. It is in the said circumstances, that the revenue authorities have declared mutation of the property in favour of the second petitioner and therefore, the tax was not received.

¶37

But on a perusal of Ext.P4, it clearly indicates that the restriction is only in an extent of 24.500 cents in Survey No. 1285 and that too in regard to the property in the possession of Integrated Housing Developers Limited. When

¶38

W.P.C.No. 3546 OF 2014

¶39

¶40

the restriction imposed by the revenue authorities is clear, I do not think that the petitioners property is involved in the restriction imposed in terms of Ext.P4. Under such circumstances, the respondents 3 and 4 has to verify the title deed of the petitioners ascertain that they are in possession of the properties and thereafter effect mutation in accordance with the procedure prescribed irrespective of any pending enquiry with respect of other properties involved in Kadakampally Village.

¶41

In the result, this writ petition is disposed of as under:

¶42

The respondents 3 and 4 shall conduct necessary

¶43

enquiry with reference to the property of the petitioners and shall effect mutation irrespective of the enquiry pending with respect to other lands in Kadakampally Village. This shall be done within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶44

Sd/- A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶45

lsn

Vageeswari Amma v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vageeswari Amma v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Biju Chirattavayalil Vs State of Kerala

Jose Ponatt Vs the Village Officer

Thejaswini Co- Operative Hospital& Medical Research Centre Ltd. Vs Nileshwar Municipality

R.S.Anil Kumar Vs the Kerala State Electricity Board

Achu S.Pillai Vs Central Board of Secondary Education

M/S. Precision Infratech Ltd. Vs State of Kerala