Allowed

H.Gouri v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC5 Jan 2022WP(C)/7527/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Village Officer to process the petitioner's application for transfer of registry of ancestral properties. The court clarified that registry transfer does not confirm title as the will remains unchallenged in civil court; validity of the will must be adjudicated by a civil court in the pending suit.

What did the court decide?

2nd Respondent directed to take up Ext.P2 application for transfer of registry and pass orders within two months.

H.Gouri 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 T.R.RAVI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 15TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 7527 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

H.GOURI AGED 35 YEARS D/O. HEYMAVATHY, TC 9/1751, SRLC-14, SHANKARA BHAVAN, SHANKAR LANE, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV SASTHAMANGALAM S. AJITHKUMAR

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

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

¶11

2 VILLAGE OFFICER SASTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, NCC ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

¶12

3 G.SEETHA DEVI D/O. GOURIKUTTY AMMA, SEETHARA, SHANKARA BHAVAN 3, SRLC-8, TC 9/1745, SASTHAMANGALAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 010.

¶13

R1 & R2 BY SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK, GOVT.PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.11.2021, THE COURT ON 05.01.2022 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶16

¶17

T.R. RAVI, J.

¶18

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶19

Dated this the 5^th day of January, 2022

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P2 application for transfer of Registry filed by the petitioner and pass orders on the same. The case of the petitioner is that the properties originally belonged to one G.Ambika who had executed a registered 'Will' (document No.20/2015 of SRO, Sasthamangalam) on 22.1.2015 settling the properties scheduled as 1 and 2 in the document in favour of the petitioner. The copy of the 'Will' is produced as Ext.P1. It is stated that the copy of the 'Will' was submitted for registration by the testatrix herself and that she died 5 years later on 24.4.2020. On 4.11.2020, the petitioner submitted Ext.P2 application for transfer of Registry on the basis of Ext.P1 'Will'. Meanwhile, the 3 rd respondent has filed O.S.No.212/2020 before the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram for partition and for a prohibitory injunction against the petitioner and one Achuthan Nair who is the elder brother of the 3 rd respondent. The petitioner has filed a written statement pleading that the property is not partible. The copy of

¶22

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶23

¶24

the plaint and the written statement are produced as Exts.P3 and P4 in the writ petition. The petitioner further submits that there is no suit filed challenging Ext.P1 'Will' and there are no orders of the Civil Court restraining transfer of the Registry. The 3 rd respondent has on 11.5.2020 filed an application before the 2 nd respondent contending that the 'Will' is invalid. Ext.P6 is the said application. The 2 nd respondent gave notice of hearing on 8.2.2021 and directed the parties to appear on 24.2.2021. The 3 rd respondent did not appear, but submitted another application stating that the 'Will' is false and that it is for the petitioner to prove that the 'Will' is a valid document. It is also stated that the 3 rd respondent has filed an application before the 2 nd respondent for transfer of the Registry on the ground that the properties are heritable and that it was devolved on her as per the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. She has prayed to keep the proceedings for transfer of Registry on the request of the petitioner in abeyance. The said application has been produced as Ext.P7 along with the writ petition.

¶25

2 . The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the law is well settled that the mutation does not confer any right, title or interest in a property. The mutation of property in the revenue records neither creates nor extinguishes title to the property nor

¶26

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶27

¶28

has it any presumptive value on title. (See Balwant Singh v. Daulat Singh (1997) 7 SCC 137 ). The entries made on mutation are relevant only for the purpose of collecting land revenue. It is to be held that the entries in the revenue records or jamabandi have only fiscal purpose (See Suraj Bhan v. Financial Commissioner (2007) 6 SCC 186) . Similar view has been expressed in several cases.

¶29

3 . In the case on hand, Ext.P1 is a registered 'Will' executed in 2015. The testatrix died in 2020. Ext.P6 application was filed by the 3 rd respondent before the 2 nd respondent on 11.5.2020 contending that the 'Will' is invalid. On 4.11.2020 the petitioner filed Ext.P2 application before the 2 nd respondent seeking transfer of Registry. O.S.No.212/2020 has been filed by the 3 rd respondent on 14.12.2020. Ext.P7 application was filed by the 3 rd respondent on 24.2.2021, requesting to keep the proceedings of transfer of Registry in abeyance. It can be seen from Exts.P6 and P7 that the 3 rd respondent is very much aware of Ext.P1 'Will'. In paragraph 16 of Ext.P3 plaint, the 3 rd respondent has stated about a lawyer notice dated 27.2.2020 in which the execution of 'Will' has been referred to. However, there is no specific challenge in Ext.P3 as against the 'Will', though it is filed after filing Ext.P6. As long as the 'Will' is not specifically put in issue before a court of law, I am of

¶30

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶31

¶32

the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for.

¶33

4 . In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The 2 nd

¶34

respondent is directed to take up Ext.P2 application for transfer of Registry and pass orders on the same within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion regarding the merits of the claim of the petitioner regarding the title to the property. Transfer of Registry, if ordered by the 2 nd respondent in favour of the petitioner will not in any way prejudice the contentions of the 3 rd respondent in Ext.P3 suit initiated by her. If at any stage of the proceedings in Ext.P3 suit or in any other civil proceedings the validity of the 'Will' is put in issue, necessarily, the petitioner as well as the 3 rd respondent will be governed by the decision of the Civil Court insofar as the title to the property is concerned. The petitioner will also not be entitled to any equity on the basis of any favourable orders passed by the 2 nd respondent, pursuant to the directions contained in this judgment.

Sd/-

T.R. RAVI JUDGE

dsn

W.P.(C)No.7527 of 2021

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7527/2021

¶41

PETITIONER EX	HIBITS
EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED WILL NO.20/2015.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION OF TRANSFER OF REGISTRY DATED 4.11.2020.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN OS 212/20 OF SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S.212/20 OF SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.S.212/20 OF SUB COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT.11.5.2020.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DT.4.3.2021.

H.Gouri v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.Gouri 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radhakrishnan Vs the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Josco Jewellers Pvt. Ltd. Vs Thrikkakara Municipality

Karthikeyan Pillai v., Vs Pavithreswaram Grama Panchayath

Shri. Vijumon V.B Vs Poothadi Grama Panchayath

A.D.Radhakrishanan, Vs Poothadi Grama Panchayath

Abdul Gafoor Vs Poothadi Grama Panchayath