Partly allowed

Akbar. A.H v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC6 Jul 2020WP(C)/12669/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner's property sale agreement faced increased stamp duty due to revised fair values. Due to COVID lockdown affecting office functioning and stamp availability, petitioner sought further extension via representation. Court disposed of limited writ petition by directing expedient consideration of the representation by the first respondent. No other relief granted.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P3 expeditiously with notice to petitioner.

Akbar. A.H Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.12669 OF 2020(G)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

AKBAR. A.H AGED 64 YEARS

¶8

S/O.HYDROSE HAJI, RESIDING AT AAMBAKUDI HOUSE, WEST KADUNGALLOOR.P.O, ALUVA-683110

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON SRI.P.S.APPU

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶12

2 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, 2ND FLOOR, PERIMBILLY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, SHENOYS, KOCHI, KERALA-682011

¶13

3 THE SUB REGISTRAR ALANGAD KONGORPILLY.P.O, ALANGAD, ALUVA-683518

¶14

OTHER PRESENT:

¶15

SR.GP.K.P.HARISH

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC 12669 of 2020

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 6^th day of July, 2020.

¶21

The petitioner had entered into an agreement for sale of his property admeasuring 70 cents comprised in Sy.No.376/9, 10 of Alangad Village in Parur Taluk. While the agreement was in currency, the Government revised the fair value of landed

¶22

properties in the State, which resulted in substantial increase in stamp duty. The revised rates were however not imposed till 15.05.2020 in view of the COVID pandemic and the resultant lockdown. According to the petitioner, the benefit of such extension of time did not actually inure to persons like him, since the Sub Registrar Offices were not functioning and stamp papers were not available during the extended period. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred

¶23

¶24

WPC 12669 of 2020

¶25

Ext.P3 representation before the Government seeking further extension of time for imposing the revised fair value. The limited prayer in the writ petition is for an expeditious consideration of Ext.P3.

¶26

2. I heard the learned Government Pleader

¶27

also.

¶28

In view of the limited relief sought, the writ

¶29

petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider Ext.P3, with notice to the petitioner and pass orders thereon as

¶30

expeditiously as possible, particularly so, in view of the fact that the request of the petitioner is for extension of the time limit till 31.07.2020.

¶31

sd/V.G.ARUN JUDGE

Scl/06.07

WPC 12669 of 2020

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DATED 16.5.2020

¶38

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE MADHYAMAM DAILY DATED 17.5.2020

¶39

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.5.2020

Akbar. A.H v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akbar. A.H 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 Mathrubhumi Printing and Publishing Co.Ltd Vs the State of Kerala

V.K.Cheriyan Vs the District Executive Officer

Ananthu.S.Anup Vs the District Collector Kollam

Germiyas Victor Vs the Secretary

Abdul Rahiman, Vs the Secretary

Philip Varghese Vs the Joint Regional Transport Officer