Privy Council
Respondents directed to take immediate measures to effect mutation, assign Thandapper number, and collect land tax within three weeks.
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 MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942 WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T)
PETITIONER:
KALATHINGAL ESHAQUE, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. IBRAHIM HAJEE, KALATHINGAL HOUSE, COTTON MILL ROAD, NALLALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673027.
BY ADVS. SRI.NIRMAL. S SMT.VEENA HARI
RESPONDENT:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, ERANHIPPALAM, WAYANAD ROAD, KOZHIKODE-673020.
2 THE TAHSILDAR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE-673001.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PANNIANKARA VILLAGE, PANNIANKARA, KOZHIKODE-673001.
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, BEYPORE VILLAGE OFFICE, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE-673001.
5 THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, SMUGGLERS AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANPULATORS, UTSAV, NO.64/1, G.N. CHETTY ROAD. T. NAGAR, CHENNAI, TAMILNADU-600017.
R5 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA
R1-4 SRI BIMAL K NATH SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.09.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 2
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by the refusal on the part of the revenue authorities effecting mutation of the property acquired by the petitioner as the successful auction bidder in an auction conducted by the Competent Authority under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the petitioner has approached this Court with this Writ Petition.
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 3
Court as well. Though a review petition was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the same was also dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits. Thereafter auction was conducted and the petitioner became the successful bidder. Exhibit P1 and P2 Sale Certificates are the sale certificates issued in his favor on 2.8.2019.
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 4
the petitioner has submitted Exhibit P3 representation before the 1st respondent and Exhibit P 4 representation before the 5th respondent. When no action was taken, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:-
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 5
Registry cases and the question of legal right is always subject to adjudication by Civil courts and pattas could be revised from time to time in accordance with such judicial decisions. Under the provisions of the Land Tax Act, 1961 'landholder' as defined under Section 3(3)(d) means the person in whose name a land is registered. Under Section 5 of the Act of 1961, a duty is cast upon the land holder to pay the basic tax over the land and a corresponding duty is cast upon the revenue officers to collect the same. If a landholder fails to pay the land tax, the amount is to be realised by recourse to revenue recovery proceedings. In other words, the provisions mandate that if a land remains registered under the name of a person, he is bound to pay land tax in respect of the same. As a corollary, when the landholder offers to pay the basic tax due on a land, the Officer entrusted with the duty to collect the same has no authority to refuse it. Therefore, in cases like the present one, where the statutory authority in accordance with the provisions of the Statute has sold the property in public auction and when the petitioner became the successful bidder and the Sale Certificate was issued in his favor, then the petitioner / assignee will become the landholder and by the cumulative impact of S.5(2) and S.3(3)(d) of the Land Tax Act, 1961, the competent revenue officials are under the bounden and statutory obligation to accept basic land tax from them. The Revenue officials may do well to remind themselves the observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Surney v. Inder Kaur (AIR 1996 SC 2823) and in Prahlad Pradhan and Others v Sonu Kumhar and Others [2019 (14) SCALE 48] that mutation of property in the revenue
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 6
records does not create or extinguish title, nor has it any presumptive value on title and it only enables the person in whose favour mutation is ordered to pay the land revenue in question.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
DSV
WP(C).No.13152 OF 2020(T) 7
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 02/08/2019 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY IN RS. NO.59/1.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE CERTIFICATE DATED 02/08/2019 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY IN RS. NO.97/2.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29/05/2020.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/05/2020.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
NIL
//TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether revenue officials are statutorily obligated to accept land tax and effect mutation when a person is the successful auction bidder.
Whether the Tahsildar is required to decide the validity of documents or the title of the previous owner during mutation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sainudheen v. State of KeralaFollowed¶29
Sainudheen v. State of Kerala (2013 (1) KHC 437)
Surney v. Inder KaurReferred¶31
Surney v. Inder Kaur (AIR 1996 SC 2823) · Who else cites this
Prahlad Pradhan and Others v Sonu Kumhar and OthersReferred¶31
Prahlad Pradhan and Others v Sonu Kumhar and Others [2019 (14) SCALE 48]
2 provisions across 1 enactments
KALATHINGAL ESHAQUE
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERANHIPPALAM
THE TAHSILDAR, KOZHIKODE
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PANNIANKARA
THE VILLAGE OFFICER, BEYPORE
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, SMUGGLERS AND FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANPULATORS
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
Parties & counsel
