Disposed

Suja Biju v. the Village Officer, Kuravilangadu

Kerala HC1 Mar 2018WP(C)/1149/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition where the petitioner, who purchased land, sought mutation of her name. The court directed the Tahsildar to consider the application with relevant settlement registers and reports within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tahsildar to consider the mutation application along with specific settlement registers and reports within three months.

Suja Biju Vs the Village Officer, Kuravilangadu — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 10TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶5

WP(C).No. 1149 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SUJA BIJU W/O. BIJU, BILJA VILLA, KOZHA BRANCH OFFICE, KURAVILANGADU POST.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.MATHEW DEVASSI

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KURAVILANGADU PIN - 686 633.

¶11

2. THE TAHSILDAR

¶12

MEENACHIL, MEENACHIL POST, PALA - 686 589.

¶13

3. GEETHA (IMPLEADED IN HER PERSONAL CAPACITY), NOW WORKING AS SUB QUARTERS DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, COLLECTORATE POST, KOTTAYAM - 686 002.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.M.MANOJ

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 1149 of 2018 (P)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:

¶19

EXHIBIT P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1249 OF 2009 OF KURAVILAGNAD S.R.O DATED 23.7.2009.
EXHIBIT P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.7.2009.
EXHIBIT P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2590 OF 2008 OF KURVILANGAD S.R.O DATED 30.9.2008.
EXHIBIT P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 04.5.2017 EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF TAX FOR THE YEAR 2017-18 IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY.
EXHIBIT P5	A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY IN SY.NO.914/3A.
EXHIBIT P6	A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY IN SY.NO.914/3B.
EXHIBIT P7	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KURAVILANGADU DATED 20.5.2017.
EXHIBIT P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE TALUK SURVEYOR AND THE HEAD SURVEYOR DATED 06.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 06.11.2017.
EXHIBIT P10	A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 01.12.2017.
EXHIBIT P11	A TRUE COPY OF THE ANOTHER REPORT OF THE
	CHARGE OFFICER (3RD RESPONDENT) DATED 12.12.2017.

¶20

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

dlk

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

W.P.(C). No.1149 of 2018

¶26

Dated this the 1^st day of March, 2018

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

As per Ext.P1 sale deed petitioner purchased an extent of 6.60

¶29

Ares of dry land in Survey No.914/3A1 corresponding to property in

¶30

Block No.VIII, R.S No.357/7 of Kozha Kara, Kuruvilangadu Taluk. An

¶31

application was submitted for effecting mutation of the said property

¶32

in her favour, but, Ext.P2 communication was issued stating that, correction deed is required to be produced in order to proceed with

¶33

the application submitted by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, as per Exts.P5 and P6 settlement registers, the property in

¶34

question is recorded as 'purayidam', and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of the said document. So also on the basis

¶35

of the application Exts.P7 to P9 reports are filed by the respective

¶36

statutory authorities stating that, the property concerned is

¶37

'purayidam' and is entitled to be mutated accordingly. Any how,

¶38

W.P.(C). No.1149 of 2018

¶39

¶40

there is no finality attained to the application submitted by the

¶41

petitioner, therefore, I think it is only appropriate that since it is a statutory application, the authority vested with powers under the

¶42

Transfer of Registry Rules, 1966 is to take a decision.

¶43

Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶44

learned senior Government Pleader, there will a direction to the

¶45

second respondent to consider the application pertaining to Ext.P2

¶46

order, and taking into account Exts.P5 and P6 settlement registers as

¶47

also Exts.P7 to P9 reports, at the earliest possible time, and at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after securing participation of the petitioner and any other interested persons.

¶48

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶51

dlk/1/3/

Suja Biju v. the Village Officer, Kuravilangadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suja Biju v. the Village Officer, Kuravilangadu

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

Rappai Vs Dr.a.Kowsigan

Girish V.P. Vs Kochu Rani Jose

K.R. Prasad Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises

K.M. Bhava Vs Dr. Muralidhara Das

Bhadra Oil Mills Vs the Commissioner of Food Safety

George K.Vallamattom Vs Kerala State Construction Corporation