Petitioner challenged an order impounding a rectification deed, arguing it was not a conveyance. Court relied on Jihas ruling to allow petition, quash order, and direct release of the deed.
Order quashed; second respondent directed to release rectification deed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/27TH MAGHA, 1937
WP(C).No. 21299 of 2012 (J)
PETITIONER(S):
DAISY VARGHESE AGED 52 YEARS WIFE OF LATE B VARGHESE A-6 ABHISHEKA KARIKKAMURI CROSS ROAD ERNAKULAM 11
BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, ERNAKULAM-682 016.
2. THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM-682 016.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.JAYAKUMARI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANU SIVARAMAN, J.
W.P(C).No. 21299 of 2012
Dated this the 16th February, 2016
JUDGMENT
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
WP(C).21299/12 2
front yard of dimension 5x3 meters” amounts to a fresh conveyance of property and therefore, the document has been impounded.
In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. Exhibit P4 is quashed. The second respondent is directed to release the rectification deed registered by him to the petitioner in accordance with law.
ANU SIVARAMAN
vgs17/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a rectification deed adding omitted details of an undivided share in land constitutes a fresh conveyance requiring full stamp duty liability.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jihas v. District RegistrarRelied on¶3
Jihas v. District Registrar [2012(3) KLT 194]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Daisy Varghese
The District Registrar, Office of the District Registrar, Ernakulam District
The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar
Anu Sivaraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
