Disposed

Rajan v. the Tahsildar, Mannarkkad

Kerala HC5 Aug 2021WP(C)/2257/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, claiming absolute title, sought writ directions after the 2nd respondent refused basic tax due to alleged attachments. Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation while adhering to the District Collector's circular and afford notice to affected parties within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to produce judgment copy; 1st respondent directed to consider petitioner's representation per District Collector's circular and pass orders with notice to affected parties within t

Rajan Vs the Tahsildar, Mannarkkad — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

WP(C) NO. 2257 OF 2020 1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶5

THURSDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 14TH SRAVANA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 2257 OF 2020

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

RAJAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOPI, PUNNARAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PULASSERI POST, KOPPAM, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 307.

¶8

BY ADV R.SREEHARI

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD, OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD, POST MANNARKKAD-678 582.

¶11

2 VILLAGE OFFICER, THACHANATTUKARA II VILLAGE, THACHANATTUKARA POST, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 583.

¶12

SMT K AMMINIKUTTY, SR GP

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 2257 OF 2020

¶15

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

Petitioner states that he is the absolute owner in title and possession of property having an extent of 62.25 cents comprised in Sy.No.178/1A and 178/3A of Thachanattukara II Village. The aforesaid property is stated to have been acquired by him on the strength of Document No.2101/2013 of the Mannarakad SRO. He states that he has been remitting tax as is evident from Ext.P1 tax receipt. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that later, the 2nd respondent has refused to accept basic tax stating that there are some attachments in respect of the said property. In the said circumstances, the petitioner is stated to have filed Exts.P3 and P4 representations before the 1st and 2nd respondents. Alleging inaction, the petitioner is before this Court seeking directions to the respondents to consider Exts.P3 and P4 representations and pass orders in terms of Ext.P5 circular issued by the District Collector, Palakkad and for other incidental reliefs.

¶18

The learned Government Pleader on instructions submits that in respect of the very same property, another individual had also claimed title and possession. The Village Officer has conducted a site inspection and some discrepancies were noted. It is submitted now that Ext.P3 is pending,

¶19

WP(C) NO. 2257 OF 2020 3

¶20

the same can be considered by the 1st respondent in the light of Ext.P5.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the submissions

¶22

made across the Bar, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to take up Ext.P3 application in the light of Ext.P5 circular issued by the District Collector, Palakkad and pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, with notice to the petitioner as well as the affected parties, if any. The orders as directed above shall be passed expeditiously, in

¶23

any event, within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶24

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with this

¶25

judgment before the 1st respondent to ensure compliance.

¶26

This writ petition is disposed of.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

sru

¶31

WP(C) NO. 2257 OF 2020 4

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2257/2020

¶33

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶34

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 13.05.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF NON-ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 12.06.2019. EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.12.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 16.12.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 26.01.2019 ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.

¶35

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL

Rajan v. the Tahsildar, Mannarkkad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan v. the Tahsildar, Mannarkkad

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

Rakesh T. Vs State of Kerala

Pushpa Chikkatti Vs the State of Kerala

Binoy T.M Vs M.T.Sukumaran

Shri. K.P. Lakshmanan Vs the State of Kerala

Savithri Vs the Deputy Collector

T.M.Thomas Vs the District Collector,Kannur