Disposed

Sasikala Mohanachandran v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 Mar 2017WP(C)/3704/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioners' pending application for land measurement and tax assessment. The Court ordered a survey and demarcation of boundaries based on the petitioners' documents and mandated tax payment consideration if the findings favor the petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the second respondent (Tahsildar) to consider the petitions application for measurement and tax assessment within two months and demarcate boundaries.

Sasikala Mohanachandran Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2017/1ST CHAITHRA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 3704 of 2016 (K)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. MRS. SASIKALA MOHANACHANDRAN, W/O.LATE MOHANACHANDRAN, AVITTAM HOUSE, C.C.XXXI/1038, PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM.

¶8

2. SHYAM MOHAN, AGED 25, S/O.LATE MOHANACHANDRAN, AVITTAM HOUSE, C.C.XXXI/1038, PONNURUNNI, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BABU PAUL.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶12

2. THE TAHSILDAR, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 553.

¶13

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE, CHINNAKANAL, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 618.

¶14

BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R. DEEPA.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22-03-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

rs.

¶17

WP(C).No. 3704 of 2016 (K)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶20

P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2021/1996/1 OF THE SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE RAJAKUMARI.

¶21

P2TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.218/2004 OF THE SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE RAJAKUMARI.

¶22

P3 - TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DTD. 09.05.2007 ISSUED BY CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE OFFICE.

¶23

P4 - TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DTD. 17.11.2005 ISSUED BY CHINNAKANAL VILLAGE OFFICE.

¶24

P5 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 05.11.2015.

¶25

P6 - TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 05.11.2015.

¶26

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶31

W.P.(C). NO. 3704 OF 2016

¶32

Dated this the 22^nd day of March, 2017

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

The petitioners are the only legal heirs of one Mohanachandran, who expired on 22.1.2003. Late Mohanachandran purchased an extent of 2.38 acres of land in Survey No. 20/1 of Chinnakanal Village. The above said properties were originally obtained by one Alagirisami by way of assignment from the Government vide L.A. No. 40/78/Chin. After purchase of the aforesaid properties, the predecessor in interest of the property has effected mutation in the revenue records and was paying the land tax till 2007. However, during the Munnar operations, notice was issued to the petitioners to produce their title deeds which was scrutinized and verified by the Tahsildar and the special team under 5 deputy collectors engaged by the Government specifically for this purpose. However, the said officers could not find any flaw in the title deed of the

¶35

W.P.(C). NO. 3704 OF 2016 2

¶36

petitioners after scrutiny. Inspite of all these aspects, the land tax was not accepted stating that petitioners are in possession of excess land consequent to which petitioners have submitted Ext. P5 application before the second respondent, under the provisions of the Kerala Surveys and Boundaries Act and the appended Rules. However, no action is initiated. Petitioner has also submitted Ext.P6 before the statutory authority to receive the tax as per the provisions of the Land Tax Act, 1961. The said applications are pending and thus seeking appropriate directions, this writ petition is filed.

¶37

The second respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit and among other contentions, it is stated in Paragraph 8, as follows-:

¶38

"8. It is submitted that the Survey Superintendent, Resurvey Nedumkandam conducted a detailed survey of the land in question. The survey superintendent submitted a report in this regard to the Commissioner, Land Revenue on 01.09.2009 vide number B1-159/09 where in it was reported that the land in question is

¶39

W.P.(C). NO. 3704 OF 2016 3

¶40

actually situated in sy.no 514 of Chinnakkanal village. But the patta no. LA 40/78 is seen assigned on the land comprised in sy. no. 20/1 of Chinnakkanal village. The report and sketch of the Resurvey superintendent dtd. 01.09.2009 clearly negates the documentary right of the petitioners and their predecessors. The fact is that the patta no. LA 40/78 has no relevance in connection with the land-in-question."

¶41

Therefore, according to the learned Government Pleader the area occupied by the petitioners are suspected and therefore the tax cannot be accepted for the said land.

¶42

Anyhow, after hearing learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Senior Government Pleader and perusing the documents and pleadings on record, I am of the considered opinion that since a statutory application is submitted by the petitioners, evident from Ext. P5 for measurement of the land the entire issue can be given a quietus by conducting a survey and demarcating the boundaries in accordance with the documents held by the petitioners and other relevant records. Therefore, there will

¶43

W.P.(C). NO. 3704 OF 2016 4

¶44

be a direction to the second respondent to take on board Ext.P6 application submitted by the petitioners and consider the same, in accordance with law, after providing sufficient participation to the petitioners as well as any other interested or affected persons, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. I also make it clear that if a finding is rendered by the second respondent in favour of the petitioners, the payment of tax as is requested in Ext. P6 shall be taken into consideration by the authorities under the Land Tax Act, 1961.

¶45

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶46

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶47

DCS

Sasikala Mohanachandran v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sasikala Mohanachandran v. State of Kerala

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

The Special Deputy Tahsildar (Rr) Vs Bijoy

Subair Kutty Vs State of Kerala

Amal F.R @ Amal Fasal Rahman Vs the Central Board of Secondary Education, Rep.by Its Secretary

Mannarcaud Kudumasree (Cds) Vs the State of Kerala

Baby.K.T Vs State of Kerala

Anas A.R. Vs the Manager