Dismissed

K.Moudammal v. Alfas

Kerala HC11 Nov 2019WP(C)/17266/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner challenged an ownership certificate issued without hearing. The Court held that since an alternative statutory appeal was pending, intervention was inappropriate. It directed the Panchayat Committee to decide the appeal within one month, regulating all further actions on the certificate until then.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Panchayat Committee to dispose of the pending statutory appeal (Ext.P10) within one month, affording a hearing to all parties; all further action based on the challenged hierarchy certifi

K.Moudammal Vs Alfas — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 20TH KARTHIKA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019(G)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

K.MOUDAMMAL, BABUKHAN PURAYIDAM, NADUKKUNNU, PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT THOPPIL HOUSE, KANNAMKARA, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 647 , PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.JOSEPH JERARD SAMSON RODRIGUES SRI.ROVIN RODRIGUES

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 ALFAS, S/O NAJEEB, KONKOTTUTHUNDUPURAYIDOM, NADUKUNNU, PATHANAPURAM-689 695, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶11

2 ALIF, S/O ABDUL AZIZ, KONKOTTUTHUNDUPURAYIDOM, KADUKUNNU, PATHANAPURAM-689 695, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶12

3 THE SECRETARY, GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PATHANAPURAM-689 695, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶13

R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEJITH (S-3453) SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW, SC, PATHANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KOLLAM

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.11.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The petitioner has approached this Court impugning Ext.P5 Ownership Certificate issued by the Secretary of Pathanapuram Grama Panchayat, on the allegation that it has been granted without hearing him. The petitioner thereafter concedes that pending this lis, he had obtained Ext.R1(d) document, which is the decision of the Secretary of the Panchayat leading to Ext.P5 and that he has challenged the said decision through Ext.P10 statutory appeal before the Committee of the said Panchayat. The petitioner, therefore, prays that Ext.P5 be set aside, since it has been issued without hearing him, and that the Panchayat be directed to take up and consider Ext.P10 appeal within a time frame.

¶19

The learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submits that. as is evident from Ext.P3, a decision had been taken earlier by the Secretary asking his clients to produce the authenticated copy of the Will with respect to their property and that it is only on production of the same that Ext.R1(d) decision was taken, leading to the issuance of Ext.P5 certificate. The

¶20

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019

¶21

¶22

learned counsel submits that since the petitioner has already challenged Ext.R1(d) through a process of law, by preferring Ext.P10 before the Panchayat Committee, this writ petition is not maintainable. He, therefore, prays that this writ petition be dismissed.

¶23

When I consider the submissions made and the materials available on record, it is prima facie evident that Exts.R1(d) and P5 had been issued without hearing the petitioner. However, since the petitioner has already chosen to challenge Ext.R1(d) before the Panchayat Committee, by preferring Ext.P10, I am certainly of the view that the said appeal must be decided and disposed of by the said Committee at the earliest, and without any further delay. Since the petitioner has already invoked his alternative remedy, I do not deem it appropriate that this Court should intervene in this matter at this stage.

¶24

Resultantly, I direct the Committee of Pathanapuram Grama Panchayat to take up Ext.P10 appeal of the petitioner and dispose of the same, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and respondent Nos.1 and 2, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶25

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019

¶26

¶27

Until such time, as the afore exercise is completed, all further action at the hands of any other Authority based on Ext.P5, will be deferred and such action will be regulated by the decision to be taken by the Panchayat Committee.

¶28

This Writ Petition is thus ordered.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

sru

¶33

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX

¶36

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED 24.6.2019, ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PATHANPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL ) NO 24492 OF 2018 DATED 13.12.2018 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT BEARING NO B2-49/18 DATED 22.3.2019 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT RESPECT OF BUILDING NO 347/8 FOR THE YEAR 2019-20 DATED 29.5.2019 EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE, ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 DATED 11.6.2019, ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT PATHANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005 EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT, 2005. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN E.P.NO.31/1994 IN O.S.NO.50 OF 1976 DATED 26.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE COURT OF THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE, KOTTARAKKARA. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 25.06.2018 FILED BEFORE THE TALUK TAHSILDAR, PATHANAPURAM.

¶38

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL NO.5566 OF 2019 FILED BEFORE PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE, PATHANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH.

¶39

WP(C).No.17266 OF 2019

¶40

¶41

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF PATHANAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 17.07.2019.

¶42

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20/9/1983 IN RSA 616/78 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶44

EXHIBIT R1(b) TRUE COPY OF WILL DEED NO.59/5/III DATED 31/10/2005 OF SRO PATHANAPURAM EXHIBIT R1(c) TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 13/11/2017 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PATHANAPURAM. EXHIBIT R1(d) TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.B2-5549/18 DATED 7/6/2019 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

K.Moudammal v. Alfas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Moudammal v. Alfas

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

K.S.Biju Vs State of Kerala

Vanaja K. Vs Palakkad Municipality

T.T.Abdul Rasak Vs Wandoor Grama Panchayath

M.a.Anees Vs Karumaloor Grama Panchayath, Represented by Its Secretary

Indian Pentecostal Church Vs the State of Kerala

K.T.Jamalu, Vs District Collector