A writ appeal against a single Bench order directing revenue authorities to accept land tax and consider possession certificate applications for an appellant, despite the pendency of a civil suit challenging her title. The High Court found no error in the lower court's direction.
The writ appeal was dismissed; no additional relief was granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF MARCH 2020 / 13TH PHALGUNA, 1941
WA.No.196 OF 2020
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.10.2019 IN WP(C) 7154/2019(T) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SR.SALOMI
AGED 65 YEARS
D/O.VARGHESE, MANAGER, MOUNT TABOR ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL, MEPPADY, WAYANAD-673 577.
BY ADV. SRI.BIJU ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
R1-4 BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IP, GOVERNMENT PLEADER R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.03.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 196/2020
: 2 :
Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2020.
JUDGMENT
S. Manikumar, CJ
Challenge in this appeal is to the directions issued in W.P.(C) No. 7154 of 2019 dated 10.10.2019, by which writ court ordered thus:
“On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, and finding that the mere pendency of a civil suit cannot be a reason for the revenue authority to refuse to accept tax from a person who has established her title over the property in question, I direct the 4th respondent to consider the title deeds produced by the petitioner to establish her title over the land in question, and accept the land tax in respect of the said land. Thereafter, if an application is preferred by the petitioner for a Possession Certificate, the said respondent shall also consider the said application based on the acceptance of tax from the petitioner. The 4th respondent shall do the needful within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the acceptance of tax from the petitioner or the issuance of the Possession Certificate to the petitioner will not prejudice the rights of the parties to the suit stated to be pending before the civil court.”
W.A. No. 196/2020
: 3 :
revenue officials are bound to receive revenue and also issue possession certificate to the appellant/ petitioner based on the existing records and past practice till a competent court orders otherwise.
W.A. No. 196/2020 : 4 :
for a possession certificate, respondent No.4 shall also consider the said application based on the acceptance of tax from the appellant. The said directions have been issued taking note of the pendency of the suit between the appellant and respondent No.4. In stead of issuing a writ to the respondents to receive tax and issue possession certificate, writ court has directed respondent No.4 to consider the application submitted by the appellant along with the title deeds. We are of the view that there is no error in the judgment warranting interference of this Court.
Accordingly, this writ appeal is dismissed.
sd/- S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the single Bench directing revenue authorities to accept tax and consider possession certificate applications despite pendency of a civil suit was in error warranting interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
SR.SALOMI
STATE OF KERALA
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WAYANAD
THE TAHSILDAR, VYTHIRI
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTAPPADI
M/S.ELSTONE TEA ESTATE LTD.
S. MANIKUMAR
SHAJI P. CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
