Disposed

Augusthy Joseph v. the District Collector, Idukki

Kerala HC26 Jul 2024WP(C)/23425/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the non-consideration of an application for cancellation of a patta erroneously issued to the petitioner's sister for a larger land extent, the Court directed the District Collector to consider the complaint with notice to all affected parties within three months, ensuring an opportunity of hearing is afforded.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P1 application with notice to petitioner and sister within three months and afford opportunity of hearing.

Augusthy Joseph Vs the District Collector, Idukki — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 4TH SRAVANA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 23425 OF 2018

¶5

PETITIONER :-

¶6

AUGUSTHY JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS
S/O JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS, KAVAKATU HOUSE,
MATHAIPPARA P.O., KANNAMPADI, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶7

BY ADVS.
SRI.SOJAN MICHEAL
SMT.JENCY MICHEAL

¶8

RESPONDENTS :-

¶9

1THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI
IDUKKI COLLECTORATE, PAINAVU P.O.,
IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN:685 603.

¶10

2SPECIAL TAHSILDAR L.A
PEERUMEDU, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN:685 531.

¶11

SRI. T.JAYAN -GP

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
26.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

WP(C) NO. 23425 OF 2018

¶14

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

The writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the respondents to dispose of Ext.P1 application, for cancellation of Patta issued to the sister of the petitioner, within two months. The petitioner’s father was the owner in possession of about 5 Acres of land. The said land was divided and shared between his 7 children. After partition of the property, his sister Philomina was given 60 cents of land and out of the said 60 cents, she sold 10 cents of land. Though she was in possession of 50 cents of land, she made an application for patta for 1 acre of land, which included the land in possession of the petitioner as well. Without any site inspection and enquiry, she was granted patta for a larger extent of land than what she was in possession of. Aggrieved by the non consideration of Ext.P1 application before the 1^st respondent for cancellation of the patta, the petitioner has approached this Court with the above writ petition.

¶17

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

¶18

WP(C) NO. 23425 OF 2018

¶19

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that so far, Ext.P1 complaint has not been considered by the 1^st respondent. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the issue is regarding the family property, which is a matter to be adjudicated before the Civil Court. Ext.P1 complaint was pending with the first respondent from 2016 onwards. So far no orders have been passed by the first respondent on Ext.P1 complaint. Though the complaint is regarding the issuance of patta to Philomina, who is the sister of the petitioner, she is not made a party in the writ petition.

¶21

Considering the facts of the case, I am of the opinion

¶22

that this writ petition can be disposed of as follows :-

¶23

(i) The 1^st respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P1, if not already done, with notice to the petitioner as well as Philomina, sister of the petitioner and other affected parties, if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶24

(ii) It is made clear that before any such orders are passed, the petitioner as well as the other affected parties shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing.

¶25

WP(C) NO. 23425 OF 2018

¶26

¶27

(iii) The petitioner is directed to produce the certified copy of the judgment along with the writ petition before the 1^st respondent for compliance.

¶28

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN JUDGE

¶29

SMA

¶30

WP(C) NO. 23425 OF 2018

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23425/2018

¶33

PETITIONER EXHIBITS :-

¶34

EXHIBIT P1:TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
5.10.2016.
EXHIBIT P2:TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.

Augusthy Joseph v. the District Collector, Idukki

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Augusthy Joseph v. the District Collector, Idukki

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

Rahul.P.R Vs United India Insurance Company Limited

Thankamma Vs Vinayak R.

C.U.Scaria Vs the Secretary, Kothamangalam Municipality

National Collateral Management Services Limited Vs the Commercial Tax Officer (Special Team)

Mohanan v Vs University of Calicut

Anilkumar P Vs the Corporation Bank