Allowed

Sivadas V.C v. the District Collector, Idukki

Kerala HC3 Dec 2018WP(C)/16912/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged the Revenue Department's refusal to accept land tax and grant mutation for estate land acquired via judicial sale decrees. The Court held that registered buyers are 'land holders' under the Kerala Land Tax Act and ordered officials to immediately accept tax and complete registry transfers.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 2 and 3 directed to immediately accept basic land tax from petitioners and issue receipts; interim order made absolute; Village Officer to complete registry transfer within 2 weeks.

Sivadas V.C Vs the District Collector, Idukki — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

MONDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 16912 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SIVADAS V.C, AGED 58, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, YEARS,VALUPARAMBIL, ELAPPARA, IDUKKI.

¶8

BY ADVS.

¶9

SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI IDUKKI,685603.

¶12

2 THE TAHSILDAR PEERUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI,685 531.

¶13

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER ELAPPARA, IDUKKI,685 501.

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2018, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NOS.39091/2018, 39126/2018 & 39133/2018, AND THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶18

-2-

¶19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶20

PRESENT

¶21

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶22

MONDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶23

WP(C).No. 39091 of 2018

¶24

PETITIONER/S:

¶25

ROYMON, AGED 25 YEARS S/O. KUNJUMON, KOZHIKANAM ESTATE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI.

¶26

BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH

¶27

RESPONDENT/S:

¶28

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IDUKKI - 685 503.

¶29

2 THE TAHSILDAR, PERRUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI - 685 531.

¶30

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAPPARA, IDUKKI - 685 501

¶31

OTHER PRESENT:

¶32

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶33

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2018, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NOS.16912/2018, 39126/2018 & 39133/2018, AND THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶34

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶35

-3-

¶36

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶39

MONDAY,THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶40

WP(C).No. 39126 of 2018

¶41

PETITIONER/S:

¶42

1 YESU AGED 52 YEARS S/O. SWAMIDAS, KARMALAGIRI VEEDU, KOZHIKANAM ESTATE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI

¶43

2 DEVANESAM, AGED 48 YEARS W/O. YESU, KARMALAGIRI VEEDU, KOZHIKANAM ESTATE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI

¶44

BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH

¶45

RESPONDENT/S:

¶46

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IDUKKI 685 503

¶47

2 THE TAHSILDAR, PEERUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI 685 531

¶48

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAPPARA, IDUKKI 685 501

¶49

OTHER PRESENT:

¶50

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶51

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2018, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NOS.16912/2018, 39091/2018 & 39133/2018, AND THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶52

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶53

-4-

¶54

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶55

PRESENT

¶56

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶57

MONDAY ,THE 03RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 12TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶58

WP(C).No. 39133 of 2018

¶59

PETITIONER/S:

¶60

JESSY A AGED 32 YEARS D/O. PHILOMINA, KIZHAKKEPUTHUVAL, KOZHIKANAM ESTATE, ELAPPARA P.O., IDUKKI

¶61

BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.MANILAL SRI.S.NIDHEESH

¶62

RESPONDENT/S:

¶63

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR IDUKKI 685 503

¶64

2 THE TAHSILDAR,

¶65

PEERUMEDU TALUK, IDUKKI 685 531

¶66

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAPPARA, IDUKKI 685 501

¶67

OTHER PRESENT:

¶68

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY,SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶69

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.12.2018, ALONG WITH W.P.(C).NOS.16912/2018, 39126/2018 & 39091/2018, AND THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶70

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶71

-5-

¶72

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J .

¶73

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶74

Dated this the 3^rd day of December, 2018.

¶75

J U D G M E N T

¶76

As inter related common issues arise in these

¶77

cases, these cases are disposed of on the basis of this common judgment. W.P.(C).No.16912/2018 is taken as the leading case.

¶78

2. The petitioner in W.P.(C).No.16912/2018 was the owner of 34 cents of land in Sy.No.108 of Elappara Village in Idukki Revenue District. The original owner of the property was one Paldurai from whom the vendor of the petitioner had purchased the property, which in turn he obtained in Execution Proceedings in Ext.P-2 judgment and decree dated 2.12.2003 in O.S.No.17/2003. The total land involved in Sy.No.108 was 1.5 acres of which a portion was purchased by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.16912/2018 and the petitioners in the other Writ Petitions. Transfer of Registry has

¶79

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶80

-6-

¶81

been allowed in all the cases other than in W.P. (C).No.16912/2018 and land tax was also accepted from the respective petitioners. Thereafter, the respondents have refused to accept basic land tax from the petitioners presumably in view of the report of the Special Officer, one

¶82

Sri.Rajamanikkyam, who has recommended that no transfer of registry in any document be issued in respect of sale of estate land. It is stated that

¶83

the property involved in Ext.P-2 decree in O.S.No.17/2003 is part of the said estate land. It is in the light of these aspects, the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition with the following main prayers:

¶84

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to effect mutation/transfer of Registry in respect of the land in Sy.No.108 of Elappara Village evidenced by Ext-P7 sale deed based on Ext-P8 application forthwith.

¶85

ii) Declare that the stand of the revenue department to the effect that no revenue records be given nor accept land tax in respect of estate properties based on Special Officers Report as referred to in Ext-P11 report as illegal as are inapplicable in respect of properties sold in execution of decree and sale deeds executed by the Court in execution thereof. iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to effect mutation and accept tax in respect of the sale deed vide Ext-P7

¶86

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶87

-7-

¶88

based on Ext-P8 application having regard to the fact that, tax as well as transfer of registry was accepted and allowed in respect of the same land earlier, which had been referred to in Ext-P9 and P11 reports of the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents.”

¶89

3. Heard Sri.C.S.Manilal, learned counsel

¶90

for the petitioners in these cases and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents in these cases.

¶91

4. In all the cases, other than W.P. (C).No.16912/2018, the properties have been

¶92

mutated in the name of the respective petitioners and that land tax was also accepted from the petitioners. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.16912/2018 that the property has been mutated in favour of the

¶93

petitioner and land tax was also accepted in pursuance of the interim order dated 20.8.2018 passed in that case, which reads as follows:

¶94

“......... There will be an interim direction to the respondents to consider Ext.P-8 application and grant the transfer of registry and to accept land tax from the petitioner provisionally and pending further orders in this writ petition. Orders shall be passed within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶95

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶96

-8-

¶97

It is now submitted by the learned Senior Government Pleader on instructions from the respondents that the said order has been complied with and no Writ Appeal has been preferred, etc.

¶98

5. Therefore, in the instant case, the

¶99

petitioner is the registered land holder as understood in Sec.3(3)(d) of the Kerala Land Tax Act and further Sec.5(2) of the said Act mandates that charge on the land tax shall be accepted

¶100

from the land holder concerned. ' Land holder ' is

¶101

defined in Sec.3(3) of the Kerala Land Tax Act, which reads as follows:

¶102

' Sec.3(3): “Land holder” means,-

¶103

(a) in relation to any land held by a cultivating tenant as defined in the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 (1 of 1964), such cultivating tenant;

¶104

(b) in relation to nay land in the possession of a kanam tenant as defined in the Kanam Tenancy Act, 1955 (XXIV of 1955), such kanam tenant;

¶105

(c) in relation to any land which has not been surveyed and is not held by a cultivating tenant referred to in sub-clause (a), the proprietor of such land;

¶106

(d) in relation to any other land, the registered holder for the time being of such land, and includes his legal representatives and assigns and nay person who under any law for the time being in force is liable for the payment of public revenue due in respect of the land held by him.'

¶107

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶108

-9-

¶109

Clauses (a), (b) and (c) will not apply in the instant case and the matter could be considered under Sec.3(3)(d). In the instant cases, the petitioners are the registered land holders of the land. Earlier, the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioners were the registered land holders and pursuant to the registered sale deed, the respective petitioners, who became the assignees of the predecessors-in-interest, would stand in

¶110

the shoe of respective registered land holders. Therefore, going by the provisions contained in the Kerala Land Tax Act, the petitioners/ assignees of the respective vendors would fulfil the definition of ' landholder ' as per Sec.3(3). Moreover, the petitioners have already been formally recognised as registered land holders and land tax was also accepted from them. Therefore, it is statutory obligation of respondents 2 & 3 to accept land tax from the land holder under Sec.3(3), otherwise the non-acceptance of the land tax would be thus in violation of the statutory

¶111

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶112

-10-

¶113

obligations and duties of the competent revenue officials and so it would amount to dereliction of their duties, as otherwise, it will lead to loss of revenue. Hence, it is ordered that respondents 2 & 3 will immediately take steps to accept basic land tax from all the petitioners for the unpaid periods. Accordingly, it is ordered that the interim order dated 20.8.2018 granted in W.P. (C).No.16912/2018 is made absolute and all action

¶114

thereunder will stand regularised. The 3^rd respondent-Village Officer will accept land tax from the petitioners and issue receipt for the same without much delay, preferably within a period of 2 weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶115

With these observations and directions, the

¶116

above Writ Petitions (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶117

Sd/-

¶118

ALEXANDER THOMAS,

¶119

JUDGE.

¶120

Bkn/-

¶121

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶122

-11-

¶123

APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).No 16912/2018

¶124

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶125

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD.20.1.2012 EXECUTED BY THE COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER NAMELY SRI.PALDURAI. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.12.2003 IN OS 17/2003. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER NAMELY SRI. PALDURAI. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR COPY OF THE TANDAPER ACCOUNT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX REMITTANCE RECEIPT DATED 1.8.2017. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED IN FAVOUR OF ONE SANTHOSH R EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF REGISTRY MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT COLLECTOR EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 19.3.2018 FROM TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, PEERMADE.

¶126

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶127

-12-

¶128

APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).No 39091/2018

¶129

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶130

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD. 24.11.2015 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER.

¶131

EXT.P-2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.12.2003 IN O.S.17/2003.

¶132

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION.

¶133

EXT.P-4: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER NAMELY SRI. PALDURAI.

¶134

EXT.P-5: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 03.04.2017.

¶135

EXT.P-6: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DATED 03.09.2018.

¶136

EXT.P-7: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C) 16912/18 DATED 20.08.2018.

¶137

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶138

-13-

¶139

APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).No 39126/2018

¶140

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶141

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 9.5.2011 EXECUTED IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONERS

¶142

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.12.2003 IN O.S. 17/2003

¶143

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION

¶144

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER NAMELY SRI. PALDURAI

¶145

EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 4.11.2014

¶146

EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 3.9.2018

¶147

EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC NO. 16912/2018 DATED 20.8.2018

¶148

W.P.(C).Nos.16912, 39091, 39126 & 39133 of 2018

¶149

-14-

¶150

APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).No 39133/2018

¶151

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶152

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DTD. 23.9.2011 EXECUTED IN FAVOR OF THE PETITIONER

¶153

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2.1.2003 IN O.S. NO. 17/2003

¶154

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION

¶155

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE COURT IN FAVOUR OF THE VENDOR OF THE PETITIONER NAMELY SRI. PALDURAI

¶156

EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 16.4.2016

¶157

EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER DATED 3.9.2018

¶158

EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER IN WPC 16912/18 DATED 20.8.2018

Sivadas V.C v. the District Collector, Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivadas V.C v. the District Collector, Idukki

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

E.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala

Valsala Vs District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

Ashakumar Vs State of Kerala

Pallikkathody Madhavi Vs the Union of India

Molecular Multispeciality Hospital Vs State of Kerala

Sumathy, Vs the District Collector