Allowed

Judo Selvin.P., v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC25 Jan 2022WP(C)/997/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Devan Ramachandran consolidated three writ petitions seeking transfer of property registry. After noting a prior judgment directed such transfer subject to civil court actions and finding no pending impediment, the court ordered respondents to transfer the registry in favor of petitioners within six weeks, allowing subsequent land tax remission.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent respondent to effect transfer of Registry of properties in favor of petitioners within six weeks from date of receipt of judgment copy, affording them an opportunity to be h

Judo Selvin.P., 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

TUESDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 29989 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 BINCY, AGED 54 YEARS, W/O.K.M.BASHEER, KUTTIKATTUCHALIL, 8 ROOM LANE, AMBALAM ROAD, MUNNAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶8

2 SHAHANAZ BASHEER, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.K.M.BASHEER, KUTTIKATTUCHALIL, 8 ROOM LANE, AMBALAM ROAD, MUNNAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

SMT. K. AMMINIKUTTY, SR GP

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.01.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).997/2022, 1030/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C)NO.29989 OF 2021 & Con.Cases

¶17

-2-

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶21

TUESDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943

¶22

WP(C) NO. 997 OF 2022

¶23

PETITIONER:

¶24

JUDO SELVIN.P., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.PETER SELVIN, JAYS COTTAGE, MATTUPETTY ROAD, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 585.

¶25

BY ADV LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶26

RESPONDENTS:

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR.GP

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.01.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).29989/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

WP(C)NO.29989 OF 2021 & Con.Cases

¶33

-3-

¶34

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶35

PRESENT

¶36

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶37

TUESDAY, THE 25^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 5TH MAGHA, 1943

¶38

WP(C) NO. 1030 OF 2022

¶39

PETITIONERS:

¶40

1 JUDO SELVIN P., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. PETER SELVIN, JAYS COTTAGE, MATTUPETTY ROAD, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 585.

¶41

2 JOLSANA SELVIN, AGED 43 YEARS, D/O. PETER SELVIN, JAYS COTTAGE, MATTUPETTY ROAD, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 585.

¶42

BY ADV 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, KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT – 685613.

¶47

SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR.GP

¶48

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.01.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).29989/2021 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶49

WP(C)NO.29989 OF 2021 & Con.Cases

¶50

-4-

¶51

JUDGMENT

¶52

[WP(C) Nos.29989/2021, 997/2022, 1030/2022]

¶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 this case have already been considered

¶57

by this Court in various judgments prior,

¶58

including the one dated 09.08.2021 in W.P. (C)No.28751 of 2020 (which is produced as Ext.P5 in W.P.(C)No.29989 of 2021 and as Ext.P4 in the

¶59

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

¶60

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

¶61

against it, including before the competent Civil Court.

¶62

WP(C)NO.29989 OF 2021 & Con.Cases

¶63

-5-

¶64

– 3. Smt.K.Amminikutty learned Senior

¶65

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

¶66

submitted that she i s not aw are if an appeal has been filed against the aforementioned judgment, but added that certain proceedings are now pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

¶67

That said, to a pointed question from this Court, Smt.K.Amminikutty was unable to inform me whether any civil proceedings have been initiated against the properties in question or against the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners until now.

¶68

In the afore circumstances and since I do 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

¶69

WP(C)NO.29989 OF 2021 & Con.Cases

¶70

-6-

¶71

them relief.

¶72

Resultantly, these writ petitions are ordered; with a consequential direction to the 2^nd or the 3^rd

¶73

respondent – whoever is competent - to effect

¶74

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.

¶75

Needless to say, on the transfer of Registry

¶76

being effected, or if it has already been completed, the petitioners will be allowed to remit land tax on their respective properties in future.

¶77

The afore directions are without prejudice to

¶78

the rights of the competent Authorities to initiate any action against the properties in

¶79

question; and should such end to the detriment of

¶80

¶81

the petitioners, they will be bound by the same,

¶82

subject to their statutory remedies; further clarifying that the afore directions will not offer them any special right – either in equity or in law - at that time.

¶83

At this time, Smt.K.Amminikutty intervened to say that the pleadings of these cases do not show that any application of the petitioners for effecting transfer of registry is pending. If this be so, then I leave liberty to the petitioners or any of them to approach respondents 2 and 3 - as 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 time frame, in such case, will begin from the date on which the application is made.

¶84

Sd/DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

akv

-8-

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 997/2022

¶89

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶90

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.2212/2013 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶91

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 06.02.2018.

¶92

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONVEYANCE DEED BEARING NO.1433 OF 1982 OF DEVIKULAM SRO EXECUTED BY TATA FINALY LTD. ON 04.09.1982.

¶93

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

¶94

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶95

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

¶96

¶97

-9-

¶98

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1030/2022

¶99

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶100

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO 343/2018 OF DEVIKULAM SRO

¶101

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT P1 DATED 06-02-2018

¶102

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CONVEYANCE DEED BEARING NO. 1433 OF 1982 OF DEVIKULAM SRO EXECUTED BY TATA FINLAY LTD ON 0409-1982

¶103

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

¶104

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶105

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

¶106

¶107

-10-

¶108

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29989/2021

¶109

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶110

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.448/1982 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶111

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.2853/2012 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶112

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT WITH RESPECT TO PROPERTY COVERED BY EXT.P2 DATED 16.04.2016.

¶113

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.940/2021 OF DEVIKULAM SRO.

¶114

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P(C)NO.28751/2020 DATED 09.08.2021.

¶115

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

¶116

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

Judo Selvin.P., v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Judo Selvin.P., 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

Abdul Salim Vs National Highway Authority of India

K.A. Anwar Vs Lalithambika

Ramakrishnan Vs the Village Officer

David Marokhi, Vs the Sub Registrar, Wadakkanchery

Peethambaran N.G Vs the Village Officer

Judo Selvin P. Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer