Disposed

Koshy Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC28 Oct 2020WP(C)/28845/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent, SIDCO, to execute Sale Deeds in their favour. The Court disposed of the petition recording submissions that most deeds were executed pending specific formalities for two petitioners.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed by recording submissions that sale deeds were executed pending formalities; no grant of relief ordered.

Koshy Mathew Vs the State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 28TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020/6TH KARTHIKA,1942

¶5

WP(C).No.28845 OF 2017

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 KOSHY MATHEW,S/O.REV.M.K.MATHEW, MALLASSERIL HOUSE, CHENGANNUR P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶8

2 OMANA GOPALAKRISHNAN,W/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, BINUS BHAVANAM, KALLIMEL P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

3 RENUKA DEVDAS,W/O.DEVDASKUMAR T.N., DEVARAJA BHAVANAM, MANKAMKUZHY P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶10

4 P.D.RAJAN,S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, ARC BHAVAN, ERAVANKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA.

¶11

5 RADHAMOHANAKURUP,W/O.K.GOPALAKURUP, CHARUVIL HOUSE, KUNNAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶12

6 C.K.ALEXANDER,S/O.C.K.KUNJUMMEN, CHAKALAMURIYIL HOUSE, PUTHIYAKAVU P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶13

7 SUJA SAJI,W/O.SAJI JOHN, JOHNSON COTTAGE, KALLIMEL P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶14

8 K.M.SABU,S/O.K.M.JOHN, JOHNSON COTTAGE, KALLIMEL P.O.,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶15

9 SHEEJA MURALI,W/O.MURALI P., MURALI BHAVANAM, MANKAMKUZHY P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶16

BY ADV. SRI.P.VINODKUMAR

¶17

WP(C) No.28845/2017

¶18

: 2 :

¶19

RESPONDENTS:

¶20

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶21

2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶22

3 THE ESTATE MANAGER,INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, KOLLAKADAVU, KOLLAKADAVU P.O., ALAPPUZHA-689 622.

¶23

BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BY ADV. MR.BIJU G., SC, SIDCO GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. DEEPA NARAYANAN

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

WP(C) No.28845/2017

: 3 :

J U D G M E N T

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Dated this the 28^th day of October, 2020

¶30

The petitioners are land allottees running industrial

¶31

units in the Kollakadavu Industrial Estate in Alappuzha District. They are before this Court seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent-Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (SIDCO) to execute Sale Deeds in favour of the petitioners.

¶32

When this writ petition came up for hearing today, counsel on either side submitted that Sale Deeds have been executed by the 2^nd respondent in favour of all the petitioners, except petitioners 5 and 8.

¶33

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent submitted that the 5^th petitioner has requested for transfer of Unit in the name of his wife and the same is under process. After completing the process, respondents 2

¶34

WP(C) No.28845/2017

¶35

: 4 :

¶36

and 3 will obtain NOC and Sale Deed can be extended after obtaining NOC, subject to the compliance of all other formalities by the allottee.

¶37

As regards the 8^th petitioner, the Standing Counsel submitted that a case is pending against the allottee, who has stated that the case is over and the allottee has undertaken that he shall produce the judgment. On production of the judgment, steps will be taken to obtain NOC and execute Sale Deed, subject to allottee complying with all other formalities.

¶38

In view of the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent, no further orders are required in this writ petition. The writ petition is therefore disposed of recording the afore submissions of the Standing Counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

¶39

Sd/- N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

¶40

aks/10.11.2020

¶41

WP(C) No.28845/2017

¶42

: 5 :

¶43

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28845/2017

¶44

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:

¶45

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(1)/24649/KLD/84	THE PROCEEDINGS /L DATED 3-1-1985.
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(5)/24649/KLD/L	THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 26-11-1991.
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(1)KLD/22576/86	THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 6-11-1986.
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(5)/KLD/22576/L	THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 31-7-1992.
EXHIBIT	P5 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(1)/22576/L/86 D	THE PROCEEDINGS ATED 21-1-1988.
EXHIBIT	P6 TRUE COPY OF NO.IEK/1405/99 DATED	THE PROCEEDINGS 23-02-1999.
EXHIBIT	P7 TRUE COPY OF NO.IEK/1405/99L DATED	THE PROCEEDINGS 27-02-2013.
EXHIBIT	P8 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(5)/KLD/12799/95	THE PROCEEDINGS /L DATED 17-11-1998.
EXHIBIT	P9 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(3)/KLD/10730/20	THE PROCEEDINGS 01 DATED 27-5-2002.
EXHIBIT	P10 TRUE COPY OF NO.IE(3)/KLD/10730/01	THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 27-2-2006.
EXHIBIT	P11 TRUE COPY OF TH PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(1) 20-6-1987.	E CERTIFICATE OF /KLD/1970/87/L DATED
EXHIBIT	P12 TRUE COPY OF	THE PROCEEDINGS
	NO.IE(5)/KLD/1970/97/	L DATED 15-3-2002.

¶46

WP(C) No.28845/2017

¶47

: 6 :

¶48

EXHIBIT P13	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(3)/KLD/1970/87/L DATED 30-1-2010.
EXHIBIT P14	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(5)/KLD/2079/98 DATED 19-02-2002.
EXHIBIT P15	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(3)/KLD/15529/2002 DATED 30-7-2003.
EXHIBIT P16	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(5)/15045/KLD/94 DATED 13-8-1998.
EXHIBIT P17	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(1)/13397/KLD/84/L DATED 2-3-1994.
EXHIBIT P18	TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(1)/23055/KLD/84/L DATED 23-11-1985.
EXHIBIT P19	TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.14/2003/ID DATED 27-1-2003.
EXHIBIT P20	TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF K.J.SCARIA.
EXHIBIT P21(a) TO P21(h)	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P22	TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7-9-2016.
EXHIBIT P23	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 16362 OF 2016.

Koshy Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koshy Mathew v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Renandranadhan K.B Vs State of Kerala

Princy Mathew Vs a.Shajahan

Mahabodhi International Spiritual & Charitable Trust Vs State of Kerala

Saju C.O. Vs the State of Kerala

Sreedharan Nadakath Vs the State of Kerala

C.Soman Vs the State of Kerala