Allowed

Pathummakutty v. the Tahsildar, Tirur

Kerala HC11 Jul 2017WP(C)/13285/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought land tax acceptance for the full 1.5-acre property extent, noting a discrepancy between the deed's 1 acre 8 cents and the actual 1 acre 50 cents area. Based on a Tahsildar-ordered survey confirming the smaller area and petitioner's possession, the court allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Directing the respondents to accept land tax from the petitioner in respect of the entire 1.5 acres of property.

Pathummakutty Vs the Tahsildar, Tirur — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2017/20TH ASHADHA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 13285 of 2016 (I)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PATHUMMAKUTTY, W/O.MOIDEENKUTTY HAJI, PARUTHIKUNNEL HOUSE, PANTHARANGADI P.O., TIRURANGADI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1.THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUR TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 101.

¶11

2.THE VILLAGE OFFICER PERUMANNA PERUMANNA P.O., TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 137..

¶12

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI K.J.MANURAJ

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-07-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.V.

¶15

WP(C).No. 13285 of 2016 (I)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 1499/1961OF S.R.O KOTTAKKAL DT. 31.8.1961.

¶19

P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DT. 06.8.2015.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO JUDGE

K.V.

P.B. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶25

W.P.(C) No.13285 of 2016

¶26

Dated this the 11^th day of July, 2017

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

The grievance of the petitioner concerns the inaction

¶29

on the part of the respondents concerned in accepting the land tax in respect of the entire property covered by Ext.P1 document. The case of the petitioner is that though the extent of the property covered by the said document is 1 Acre and 50 cents, the extent is shown wrongly in the title deed as 1 Acre and 8 cents and it is on account of the said reason that the tax is not being accepted for the entire property.

¶30

A counter affidavit has been filed by the first

¶31

respondent in the matter. Paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit reads thus:

¶32

“6. The 1^st respondent replied to the petitioner that the claim of the petitioner shall be attended only after ascertaining the actual possession and rectifying the documents if required. Aggrieved by the reply of the 1^st respondent, the Petitioner submitted a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court. The 1^st

¶33

-2-

¶34

W.P.(C) No.13285 of 2017

¶35

respondent appointed the Taluk Surveryor to conduct survey along with the 2^nd respondent and to submit the report without delay. The Taluk Surveyor submitted the sketch and reported to this respondent on 19.09.2016. It was clear that the measurement shown as 30 x 40, 20 x 30 in 6 feet scale ie. 1 acre 50 cents in the document was correct and the aggregate mentioned as 1 acre 08 cents was mistaken. The Additional Tahsildar inspected the site and confirmed the report of the surveyor. As per the facts and the details of physical verification, it is found clear that the petitioner is possessing 1 acre 50 cents of land in R.S.267/1 in the gift deed of 1499/1961 Sub Registrar Office, Kottakkal, in Perumanna Village, Tirur Taluk, Malappuram District.”

¶36

In the light of the averments made by the first respondent in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to succeed.

¶37

In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to accept from the petitioner land tax in respect of the entire extent of 1.5 Acres of property covered by Ext.P1 document.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

P.B. SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶40

bpr

Pathummakutty v. the Tahsildar, Tirur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pathummakutty v. the Tahsildar, Tirur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Soman Vs Branch Manager, Ernakulam District Co-Operative Bank Ltd.

V.K. Rajan Vs District Collector

Dr.Lakshmi J.K. Vs the Medical Council of India

Hari Shankar Mohan Nair Vs State of Kerala

Nimisha Elizabeth Vs the State of Kerala

Chandran.a Vs Majalisul Hidaya Charitable Trust