Allowed

Laija Navabudeen v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Mar 2022WP(C)/4252/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought to delete the endorsement of revenue recovery attachment on her tax receipt and effect a registry transfer. The Court directed the Village Officer to issue a fresh receipt and transfer the registry based on a prior judgment, leaving challenges to that precedent open for the Division Bench.

What did the court decide?

Ordering the Village Officer to issue a fresh Tax Receipt deleting the attachment endorsement and effect transfer of Registry within one month.

Laija Navabudeen Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | 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. 4252 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

LAIJA NAVABUDEEN, AGED 53 YEARS W/O. NAVABUDEEN, SEMI, PERAYAM, THAZHUTHALA, UMAYANALLOOR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 589.

¶8

BY ADV B.MOHANLAL

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE, CIVIL LINES, CUTCHERY P. O., KOLLAM - 691 013. 3 THE TAHASILDAR (RR) TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM - 691 001. 4 THE TAHASILDAR (LR) TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM - 691 001. 5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER KILIKOLLUR VILLAGE, KILIKOLLUR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 004. 6 THE SUB REGISTRAR REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, KILIKOLLUR P. O., KOLLAM - 691 004. BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA

¶12

SRI. JAFAR KHAN SR.G.P.

¶13

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

¶14

WP(C) NO. 4252 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner impugns the endorsement

¶18

on Ext.P2 to the effect that the revenue recovery attachment subsists in the property involved in this case.

¶19

Sri.B.Mohan Lal – learned counsel for

¶20

the petitioner, argues that Ext.P1 judgment has already been obtained by his client’s predecessor-in-interest, whereby, the order of attachment under Form 11 issued by the Tahsildar (Revenue Recovery) had been quashed and the Financial Institution declared eligible to deal with the property in any manner that they may deem fit, under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and

¶21

Enforcement of Securities Interest Act ('the SARFAESI Act' for brevity).

¶22

¶23

WP(C) NO. 4252 OF 2022

¶24

client's husband, who is now no more, purchased the property from the Financial Institution – petitioner in Ext.P1 judgment and thus argued that the impugned endorsement on Ext.P2 is egregiously improper.

¶25

Government Pleader, in response, submitted that Ext.P1 has not attained finality because the State has filed an Appeal against the same,

¶26

which is yet not numbered since there are several defects noticed therein. He argued that, therefore, until Ext.P1 is confirmed by the learned Division Bench, no relief, as sought for by the petitioner in this case, can be granted to her.

¶27

was delivered as early as on 30.07.2019. More than 2½ years thereafter, the learned Senior Government Pleader takes the stand that an

¶28

WP(C) NO. 4252 OF 2022

¶29

¶30

Appeal has been filed against it, but not

¶31

numbered, as there are defects noticed thereon. Obviously, therefore, there is no interdiction against the operation of Ext.P1 and the only aspect brought to my notice is that an Appeal is now attempted against.

¶32

I am, therefore, certain that the afore

¶33

reasons stated by the learned Senior Government Pleader cannot stand in the way of relief being

¶34

granted to the petitioner, particularly because she is the wife of the auction purchaser of the property, which was permitted to be dealt with appropriately by the Financial Institution in Ext.P1 judgment.

¶35

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the Village Officer to issue a fresh Tax Receipt deleting the endorsement of attachment

¶36

mentioned therein; with a consequential

¶37

direction to the said Authority to effect transfer of Registry of the property in favour

¶38

WP(C) NO. 4252 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

of the petitioner based on Ext.P1 judgment, as

¶41

expeditiously as is possible, but not later

¶42

than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶43

Needless to say, the contentions of the State against Ext.P1 judgment are all left open to be pursued by them appropriately before the learned Division Bench; and I make it clear that if the said Court is to find contrary to the petitioner, she will be bound by the same,

¶44

subject to her available remedies.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶47

JUDGE

¶48

SAS

¶49

WP(C) NO. 4252 OF 2022

¶50

¶51

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4252/2022

¶52

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶53

Exhibit P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 30.07.2019 IN WP(C) NO.12849/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
Exhibit P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 26.08.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR THE YEAR 2020-2021.
Exhibit P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF SRI NAVABUDEEN OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, THRIKKOVILVATTOM GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 21.11.2020.
Exhibit P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 08.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 04.10.2021 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBI	TS:
EXHIBIT R3A	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENTREPORTED IN 2018 KHC 2927
EXHIBIT R3B	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN 2021 KHC 3414
EXHIBIT R3C	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.11.2021 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.6350/2021
EXHIBIT R3D	TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 01.10.2020 IN THE WRIT PETITION NO.19291/2020
EXHIBIT R3E	TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 02.09.2021
EXHIBIT R3F	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.2196/2012 DATED 24.02.2022

Laija Navabudeen v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laija Navabudeen 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.

Jayanth P.N. Vs State of Kerala

Aswathy.L Vs Sulekha P.

Raja Singh Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer