Allowed

Jayanth P.N. v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Mar 2022WP(C)/1527/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerning transfer of property Registry bequeathed by Will was admitted. The court granted liberty to file a formal application for the second property, directing the 4th respondent to process both transfers within two weeks of receiving the application. The respondent is absolved of future liability; the petitioners bear the sole risk. The Senior Government Pleader did not con

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioners to make an appropriate application for transfer of Registry of the second item of property; the Village Officer directed to consider requisite action for both properties

Jayanth P.N. Vs State of Kerala — Partition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 JAYANTH P.N. AGED 64 YEARS S/O. P.NARAYANAN, 34/2423, VIGNESH, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682024. 2 HEMANTH P.N., AGED 58 YEARS S/O. P.NARAYANAN, 34/2423, VIGNESH, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682024. BY ADVS. GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) A.R.DILEEP P.J.JOE PAUL MANU SRINATH RAJAN G. GEORGE

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

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

¶10

2 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ERNAKULAM-682030.

¶11

3 TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNOOR, ERNAKULAM-682312.

¶12

4 VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM-682014.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY SR.G.P.

¶15

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

¶19

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The petitioners say that they have obtained the

¶22

properties involved in this case through Ext.P3 Will executed by late Poothatt Narayanan, bequeathing them in their favour. They submit that even though Exts.P4 and P5 establish that the said two items of properties are lying within the jurisdictional limits of the 4^th respondent – Village Officer and though it is not suffering from any encumbrance or charge, their application for transfer of its Registry in their favour has been refused, but without assigning any cogent reason. They say that this is egregiously improper because they are the only legal heirs o f deceased Poothatt Narayanan and since they have published Exts.P6 and P7 notices, which has not evoked any objections, thus making it perspicuous that there is no legal impediment in their request being acceded to.

¶23

Sri.George Varghese, Perumpallikuttiyil – learned counsel for the petitioners, further explained that, as can be

¶24

¶25

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶26

seen from Ext.P6, both the properties involved in this case are included therein, but that 4^th respondent is insisting on his clients obtaining a statement from a living witness to prove Ext.P3 Will. He argued that this condition is unheard of, since Ext.P3 Will is not under challenge nor is his clients' request been objected to by anyone. He, therefore, reiteratingly prayed that the 4^th respondent – Village Officer be directed to effect transfer of Registry of the properties covered by Ext.P3 Will in favour of his clients, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶27

Interestingly, the learned Senior Government Pleader – Smt.K.Amminikutty didnot contest any of the afore arguments of Sri.George Varghese Perumpallikuttiyil, but only submitted that, as regards the second item of property, the petitioners have not made a formal application for its transfer of Registry. She added that if they do so, then necessary action with respect to both properties can be taken forward and completed as per law.

¶28

¶29

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶30

Taking note of the afore submissions and since, prima facie , the petitioners have initiated action with respect to both the items, as is evident from Ext.P6, I deem it appropriate to accede to the reliefs sought for by them in this writ petition.

¶31

Resultantly, I order this writ petition, granting liberty to the petitioner to make an appropriate application before the 4^th respondent for transfer of Registry of the second item of property involved in Ext.P3 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; in which event, said Authority will consider requisite action with respect to both items of properties covered by the said Will, without insisting on obtaining the statement from a living witness, however, after complying with every other statutory requirement; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two weeks from the date on which the afore said application is received by him.

¶32

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶33

¶34

In order to obviate any apprehension on the part of the Village Officer that he may be held accountable in future, I make it clear that the transfer of Registry of the propeties will be at the sole risk and responsibility of the petitioners and that said Authority will remain indemnified from all action, if it is to be impelled in future by any other person with respect to the same.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶37

ANB

¶38

WP(C) NO. 1527 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1527/2022

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF DEATH CERTIFICATE
	ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE KOCHI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE NO.A5-13407/2018 K.DIS DATED 5.12.2018.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF WILL DATED 6.2.2010 EXECUTED BY SRI.POOTHATT NARAYANAN.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF ENCUMBRANCE ON THE PROPERTY ISSUED BY
	THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR IN
	RESPECT OF PROPERTY COMPRISED IN
	RE.SY.NO.241/7 OF EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF ENCUMBRANCE ON THE PROPERTY ISSUED BY
	THE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY COMPRISED IN
	RE.SY.NO.253/5 OF EDAPPALLY NORTH VILLAGE.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE COPY OF PUBLIC NOTICE DATED 18.11.2020 ISSUED IN THE OFFICE OF 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7	A TRUE COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE SUB REGISTRAR, EDAPPALLY
	ACKNOWLEDGING PUBLICATION OF NOTICE
	NO.1109/20 DATED 18.11.2020 IN THE OFFICE OF SUB REGISTRAR.

Jayanth P.N. v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanth P.N. 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

R.Sheeja., Vs the Tahsildar(Lr)

Vipin E.V. Vs Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd.

Baby M.J., Vs M/S. Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd.

Aswathy.L Vs Sulekha P.

Laija Navabudeen Vs State of Kerala

Raja Singh Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer