Disposed

Sindhu Baskar @ R v. Sindhu v the Tahsildar (Lr)

Kerala HC21 Nov 2022WP(C)/27769/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Tahsildar and Village Officer to consider applications regarding property mutation from a W Will. Non-objectioned items get mutation within one month; disputed items require enquiry within two months. Certified will copy treated as original.

What did the court decide?

Mutation for unopposed items within one month; enquiries for disputed items ordered within two months. Certified copy of will treated as original.

Sindhu Baskar @ R v Sindhu Vs the Tahsildar (Lr) — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SINDHU BASKAR @ R V SINDHU AGED 50 YEARS W/O. N BASKAR FLAT NO.N3, GALAXY WINDSOR ST.SEBASTIAN ROAD, VYTTILA Post-682 019, POONITHURA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. GEEN T.MATHEW O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE TAHSILDAR (LR) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FORT POST-695 023 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶11

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER PATTOM VILLAGE, PATTOM PALACE POST-695 004 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

3 ADV.R V SUJIT KUMAR S/O. LATE M RAVEENDRAN AGED 45 YEARS VASANTHA VIHAR MURINJAPALAM POST-695004, PATTOM VILLAGE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶13

REPRESENTED BY HIS GUARDIAN: SREEJA SUJIT W/O. ADV.R V SUJIT KUMAR AGED 38 YEARS VASANTHA VIHAR MURINJAPALAM POST-695 004, PATTOM VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶14

BY ADVS. ARUN CHAND PRAMOD S.K.(K/719/1995)

¶15

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

SREELA S.K.(K/733/1995) VINAYAK G MENON(K/1013/2016) BHARAT VIJAY P.(K/000976/2018) MINU VITTORRIA PAULSON(K/739/2020) THAREEQ ANVER K.(K/000942/2018) K.SALMA JENNATH(K/001505/2018)

¶18

SMT. DEEPA. V. GP.

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶21

¶22

T.R. RAVI, J.

¶23

-------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.27769 of 2022

¶24

Dated this the 21^st day of November, 2022

¶25

JUDGMENT

¶26

The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to effect mutation with regard to the properties covered by Registered Will No.62 of 2020 executed by the petitioner's father and to quash Exts.P5 and P6.

¶27

The case of the petitioner is that her father had executed the Will and original of the Will is in the possession of petitioner's brother who has been impleaded as the 3^rd respondent. It is stated that the 3^rd respondent is in a comatose stage and hence his wife Smt.Sreeja Sujit is representing him before the Court. Since the original of the Will is not produced, the Authorities have refused Transfer of Registry.

¶28

The wife of the 3^rd respondent has appeared through counsel. It is stated by the counsel that the 3^rd respondent admits the Will, but has serious reservations regarding the

¶29

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶30

¶31

bequeathal of items 3 and 6. It is stated that regarding items 4 and 5, they have no objections. As far as item 6 is concerned, it is contended that the father had only 1/3^rd right but he has bequeathed more than his share to the petitioner. With regard to the 3^rd respondent also there is a similar contention raised. The 3^rd respondent through his wife is stated to have preferred an objection before the 1^st respondent which has been produced as Ext.R3(b).

¶32

Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the 3^rd respondent and the Government Pleader, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the application submitted by the petitioner and the objections submitted by the 3^rd respondent and pass orders regarding Transfer of Registry. As far as the properties with regard to which there are no objections are concerned, the mutation shall be effected within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. As far as the disputed items are concerned, the respondents 1 and 2 shall make necessary enquiries as prescribed in the Transfer of Registry Rules and pass orders within two months from the date of

¶33

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶34

¶35

receipt of a copy of this judgment. The certified copy of the registered Will shall be treated as the original Will in the circumstances submitted by the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent and orders shall be issued on that basis.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

mpm

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27769/2022

¶42

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶43

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE NO.547/2020 DATED 05.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, EDATHALA GRAMA PANCHAYAT CERTIFYING THE DEATH OF M RAVEENDRAN ON 14.12.2020.

¶44

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE NO.6001/2014 DATED 13.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, COCHIN CORPORATION CERTIFYING THE 'DEATH OF B VASANTHA KUMARI ON 05.09.2014.

¶45

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE NO.K.DIS 4490/2021/A5 DATED 20,07.2021 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT -682 011.

¶46

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE REGISTERED WILL NO.62 OF 2020 OF BOOK III, VOLUME 10, PAGES 167 TO 176 OF S.R.O SASTHAMANGALAM DATED 04.03.2020.

¶47

EXHIBIT P4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REGISTERED WILL NO.62 OF 2020 OF BOOK III, VOLUME 10, PAGES 167 TO 176 OF S.R.O SASTHAMANGALAM DATED 04.03.2020.

¶48

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.349/21 DATED 10.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶49

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.H4/38818/21 DATED 04.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶50

WP(C) NO. 27769 OF 2022

¶51

¶52

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶53

EXHIBIT R3(A) THE TRUE COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DR. ROBIN RAVINDRAN, DEPT OF ORTHOPAEDICS, (MEMBER SECRETARY - KIMS DISABILITY ASSESSMENT BOARD), KIMS HEALTH, TRIVANDRUM. EXHIBIT R3(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 26/10/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS WIFE AND GUARDIAN BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R3(C) THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL TRACKING RECEIPT PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT R3(B) DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE MAINTAINED BY INDIA POST EXHIBIT R3(D) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT R3(B) OBJECTION SIGNED AND SEALED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶54

EXHIBIT R3(E) THE TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 26/10/2022 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS WIFE AND GUARDIAN BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶55

EXHIBIT R3(F) THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL TRACKING RECEIPT PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT R3 (E) DOWNLOADED FROM THE WEBSITE MAINTAINED BY INDIA POST.

¶56

EXHIBIT R3(G) THE TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD PERTAINING TO EXHIBIT R3(E) OBJECTION SIGNED AND SEALED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

Sindhu Baskar @ R v. Sindhu v the Tahsildar (Lr)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sindhu Baskar @ R v. Sindhu v the Tahsildar (Lr)

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

Babu T a Vs Chalakudy Municipality

Bank of Baroda, Vs the Village Officer

Nandakumar Vs the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

T. Sudesh Vs the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

Pathumma Mohammed Vs the District Collector

Sharija.a Vs Thevalakkara Farmer'S Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. NO.4047