Allowed

Raja Singh v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC21 Mar 2022WP(C)/6211/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Judge Bench issued consequential orders in three connected Writ Petitions concerning property transfer, directing official respondents to transfer property registry within six weeks and addressing land tax implications for government land.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of Registry of the properties in the respective names of the petitioners to be effected by the official respondents within six weeks.

Raja Singh Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — 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. 6211 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RAJA SINGH, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.ROBINSON, THANDAM, M.G.ROAD, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

¶11

2 THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

¶12

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNNAR VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

¶13

SRI. JAFAR KHAN SR.G.P.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).6228/2022, 6261/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶16

-2-

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶20

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

¶21

WP(C) NO. 6228 OF 2022

¶22

PETITIONERS:

¶23

1 MURUGAN, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. DAIVANAM, 12 ROOM LANE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶24

2 ARUMUGHAM, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.DAIVANAM, 12 ROOM LANE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶25

3 MEENAKSHY, AGED 46 YEARS, W/O PALANI SWAMY, 12 ROOM LANE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶26

BY ADV.SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶27

RESPONDENTS:

¶28

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685613.

¶29

2 THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

¶30

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNNAR VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

¶31

BY ADV.SRI.JAFFER KHAN, SR.GP

¶32

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).6211/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

¶33

FOLLOWING:

¶34

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶35

-3-

¶36

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶37

PRESENT

¶38

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶39

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 6261 OF 2022

¶40

PETITIONER:

¶41

BARAIL, AGED 41 YEARS, D/O.D.JAYAPAL, EMMANUEL COTTAGE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶42

BY ADV.SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶43

RESPONDENTS:

¶44

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.

¶45

2 THE TAHASILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.

¶46

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUNNAR VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.

¶47

BY ADV.SRI.JAFFER KHAN, SR.GP

¶48

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).6211/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶49

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶50

-4-

¶51

JUDGMENT

¶52

[WP(C) Nos.6211/2022, 6228/2022, 6261/2022]

¶53

I am considering these three writ petitions

¶54

together since they involve analogous factual

¶55

circumstances and seek similar, if not identical, reliefs.

¶56

involved in these cases have already been considered by this Court in various judgments prior, including the one dated 09.08.2021 in W.P. (C)No.28751 of 2020 (which is produced as Ext.P3 in W.P.(C)No.6228/2022 and as Ext.P4 in the other

¶57

two writ petitions), wherein, the official respondents were directed to effect transfer of

¶58

Registry of the properties in favour of the petitioners therein, subject to the right of the competent Authorities to initiate necessary action

¶59

against it, including before the competent Civil Court.

¶60

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶61

-5-

¶62

Sri.Jaffer Khan – learned Senior

¶63

Government Pleader, in response to the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners by their learned counsel - Sri.Latheesh Sebastian,

¶64

submitted that an appeal had been filed against the aforementioned judgment before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶65

The learned Senior Government Pleader then

¶66

added that, going by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A.No.5768/2008 and connected matters,

¶67

the Government has been given liberty to proceed

¶68

against the property without being influenced by the judgment of a learned Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.227/2001. He, therefore, prayed

¶69

that such liberty be reserved to the official respondents.

¶70

That said, to a pointed question from this

¶71

Court, Sri.Jaffer Khan was unable to inform me

¶72

whether any proceedings have been initiated

¶73

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶74

-6-

¶75

against the properties in question or against the

¶76

predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners until now.

¶77

In the afore circumstances and since I do

¶78

not see any other legal impediment standing in the way of the petitioners' request for transfer of Registry of the properties involved in this case in their favour, I deem it appropriate to grant them relief.

¶79

Resultantly, these writ petitions are ordered; with a consequential direction to the 2^nd or the 3^rd respondent – whoever is competent - to effect transfer of Registry of the properties in the respective names of the petitioners, after following due procedure and affording them an opportunity of being heard, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶80

Needless to say, on the transfer of Registry

¶81

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶82

-7-

¶83

being effected, or if it has already been

¶84

completed, the petitioners will be allowed to remit land tax on their respective properties in future.

¶85

The afore directions are without prejudice to

¶86

the rights of the competent Authorities to initiate any action against the properties in question, and should such end to the detriment of the petitioners, they will be bound by the same, subject to their statutory remedies; further clarifying that the afore directions will not

¶87

offer them any special right – either in equity or in law - at that time.

¶88

At this time, Sri.Jaffer Khan intervened to

¶89

say that the pleadings of these cases do not show

¶90

that any application of the petitioners for

¶91

effecting transfer of registry is pending. If this be so, then I leave liberty to the petitioners or

¶92

any of them, to approach respondents 2 and 3 - as

¶93

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶94

-8-

¶95

the case may be – with appropriate applications, if not already preferred, for the afore purpose, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; and the afore fixed time frame, in such case, will begin from the date on which the application is made.

¶96

After I dictated this part of the judgment,

¶97

the learned Senior Government Pleader – Sri.Jaffer Khan, submitted that it was omitted to be brought to the notice of this Court when the earlier judgments were delivered that since the land in question is a Government Land, the acceptance of tax is not possible under the Kerala Land Tax Act.

¶98

I am afraid that I cannot find favour with the

¶99

above submission of the learned Senior Government Pleader, because unless the Government takes necessary action against the properties in question, the incapacitation afore cited would have no relevance because, as has been well

¶100

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶101

settled by the various judgments of this Court, payment of land tax by the petitioners is only a fiscal matter and not an attribute of ownership

¶102

per se and it will be certainly upto the Government to take necessary action,

¶103

notwithstanding such payment.

¶104

Sd/-

¶105

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶106

akv

¶107

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶108

-10-

¶109

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6228/2022

¶110

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶111

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.57/1982 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶112

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER FROM KDH VILLAGE DATED 6.4.2016.

¶113

EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE 2ND PETITIONER FROM KDH VILLAGE DATED 27.05.2015. EXHIBIT P2(B) TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE HUSBAND OF THE 3RD PETITIONER FROM KDH VILLAGE DATED 27.05.2015.

¶114

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.28751/2020 DATED 09.08.2021.

¶115

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.29989/2021 DATED 25.01.2022.

¶116

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶117

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶118

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶119

-11-

¶120

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6261/2022

¶121

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶122

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO 1294/1981 OF DEVIKULAM SRO

¶123

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM KHD VILLAGE DATED 02-031995

¶124

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED NO 2085/2015 OF DEVIKULAM SRO

¶125

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C0 NO. 28751/2020 DATED 09-08-2021

¶126

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C0 NO. 29989/2021 DATED 25-01-2022

¶127

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶128

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

¶129

WP(C) NO.6211/2022 & Con.Cases

¶130

-12-

¶131

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6211/2022

¶132

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶133

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1003/1983 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶134

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM KDH VILLAGE DATED 01.03.2018

¶135

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELINQUISHMENT DEED NO.681/2018 OF DEVIKULAM SRO

¶136

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.28751/2020 DATED 09.08.2021.

¶137

EXHIBIT P5

¶138

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)NO.29989/2021 DATED 25.01.2022.

¶139

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶140

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE

Raja Singh v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja Singh v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

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.

Laija Navabudeen Vs State of Kerala