Remanded

Hamza Koya v. the Sub Registrar

Kerala HC29 Jul 2015RP/613/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this review petition, the petitioner challenged an order refusing to register a document on the ground that the land was government property under Section 71(3) of the Registration Act. The Court clarified that the District Collector decides the land's status. If non-governmental, registration proceeds; if governmental, NOC is issued per G.O. MS No.18/2014/TD.

What did the court decide?

Impugned judgment quashed; directions issued to District Collector to determine land status and act accordingly within stipulated timelines.

Hamza Koya Vs the Sub Registrar — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2015/7TH SRAVANA, 1937

¶5

RP.No. 613 of 2015 (G)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34665/2014 DATED 19-12-2014

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER :

¶8

HAMZA KOYA S/O.ENIKUTTY, CHAMBANTAKATH HOUSE RAYIRIMANGALAM AMSOM DESOM, P.O.TANUR-676302 MALAPPURAM DISTRICT THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND WIFE ZEENATH.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF

¶10

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :

¶11

1. THE SUB REGISTRAR TANUR-676302, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.T. SHEEBA

¶14

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

...2/-

¶17

RP.No. 613 of 2015 (G)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :

¶20

ANNEXURE A1	: COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 03/04/2010 SENT BY WIFE OF THE PETITIONER TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE ALONG WITH THE POSTAL RECEIPT AND POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD.
ANNEXURE A2	COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 10/5/2010 GIVEN BY THE COLLECTORATE, KOZHIKODE.
ANNEXURE A3	COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF NOTIFICATION UNDER SECTION 28A OF THE REGISTRATION ACT.

¶21

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL

¶22

//TRUE COPY//

¶23

P.A. TO JUDGE Mn

¶24

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶25

Review Petition No. 613 of 2015

¶26

------------------------------------------Dated this the 29^th day of July, 2015

¶27

O R D E R

¶28

This Review Petition is filed at the instance of the writ petitioner. In the writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court stating that the property situated in Re-Survey No.418/1A of Tanur Village is a Government land and he wants to alienate the property. On account of refusal of registering the documents, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶29

This Court taking note of the rigor of promise under Section 71(3) of the Registration Act, directed the petitioner to obtain NOC from the competent authority and disposed the writ petition.

¶30

Thereupon the petitioner filed Clarification Petition as I.A. No.2646/2015 stating that no competent officer has been authorised by the State for obtaining permission. This Court clarified the judgment by an order dated 17.03.2015, in the light of the Government Order as G.O.(MS) No.18/2014/TD dated 03.02.2014 stating that District Collectors of the Revenue Districts are the competent officer to issue NOC.

¶31

The present review is filed based on the notification under Section 28A of Stamp Act stating fixation of fair value.

¶32

R.P.No.613 of 2015

¶33

¶34

Petitioner submits that since the value has been fixed, treating it as a non-Government land, the judgment has to be reviewed.

¶35

The learned Government Pleader submits that, the property is still shown as 'puramboku' in the Basic Tax Register and it is a Government land and therefore review has to be dismissed.

¶36

This Court taking note of the facts and circumstances of the view that, the District Collector has to take a decision in the matter whether this is a Government land or not. If it is found that it is Government land necessarily, the application shall be considered in terms of Section 71(3) of the Stamp Act. The petitioner has to move the District Collector within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The District Collector shall take appropriate decision after verifying the relevant records and after hearing the petitioner within six weeks thereafter. Needless to say, if it is found that it is not Government land, Registering authority shall register the instrument without waiting for production of NOC.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.

¶39

Hamza Koya v. the Sub Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hamza Koya v. the Sub Registrar

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

K.P.Mohammed Vs Smt.T.K.Jayanthi

Peter Jolly Vs the District Collector

P.J.Babu Vs the Regional Transport Officer

Sajeev Abraham Vs Joint Regional Transport Officer, Pala

Sushma Vs the State Bank of India

Binu N.S. Vs the Manager, Federal Bank Ltd.