Allowed

H.Anand v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC25 Mar 2024WP(C)/4497/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached the High Court of Kerala seeking mutation of property obtained via a registered sale deed. The Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the mutation application within six months, taking village officer reports into account, despite pending resurvey.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent (Tahsildar) to consider the petitioner's mutation application, affording him an opportunity of hearing, within six months from receipt of the certified copy of the judgment

H.Anand Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.

¶4

MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 4497 OF 2014

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

H.ANAND

¶8

AGED 50 YEARS
S/O.HARIHARA IYER, HINDU, RESIDING AT TC 40/190,FIRST
PUTHEN STREET, MUTTATHARA VILLAGE,TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADV SHRI.SREEHARI INDUKALADHARAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE REVENUE SECRETARY, GOVERNMENTSECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

¶12

COLLECTORATE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.

¶13

3 THE TAHSILDAR TRIVANDRUM TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM -695 001.

¶14

4 THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.

¶15

5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER MUTTATHARA VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM - 695 020. BY ADVS.

¶16

GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶17

SRI. VENUGOPAL V (GP)

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

WP(C) NO. 4497 OF 2014 2

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that property obtained by the petitioner under document No.2127 of 1999 of Sub Registry Office, Thiruvananthapuram, has not been mutated in his favour.

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, going by Ext.P5 report of the Village Officer, Muttathara , the Thandaper number mentioned in the documents of title appears to be in the name of a third party and that mutation can be effected by assigning Thandaper Number 2754’A’. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that, by now, the resurvey proceedings have almost been completed and therefore, the issue can be decided by the 3^rd respondent having regard to Ext.P5 report of the village officer.

¶23

Learned Government Pleader submits that, going by the counter affidavit filed by the 4^th respondent also, the claim of the petitioner can be considered subject to production of BTR, sketch and the completion of resurvey.

¶24

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader and having regard to the contents of Ext.P5 and the statements in the

¶25

WP(C) NO. 4497 OF 2014 3

¶26

counter affidavit filed by the 4^th respondent, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of, directing the 3^rd respondent to take a decision on the application filed by the petitioner for mutation, also taking into consideration Ext.P5 report of the 5^th respondent. Prima facie, it appears to be clear from Ext.P5 report of the village officer that the petitioner is in possession and enjoyment of the property covered by document No.2127 of 1999 of S.R.O., Thiruvananthapuram. This is also admitted in the counter affidavit of the 4^th respondent. Therefore, it is only proper that the claim of the petitioner for mutation be considered without further delay. Since it is stated that the resurvey proceedings have yet to be completed, I direct that the claim of the petitioner for mutation be considered by the 3^rd respondent, taking into consideration Ext.P5 report of the 5^th respondent and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

GOPINATH P.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

ajt

¶31

WP(C) NO. 4497 OF 2014 4

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4497/2014

¶33

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXT.P-1: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.1
WITH REGISTERED SALE DEED.
EXT.P-2: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
5.1.2011
EXT.P-3: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.2.2011
EXT.P-4: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER DATED
22.5.2012
EXT.P-5: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT DATED 20.12.2012
EXT.P-5(a): TRUE COPY OF THANDAPER A/C
EXT.P-6: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.1.2013
EXT.P-7: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16.2.2013
EXT.P-8: THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.2.2013
ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE
SURVEY DEPARTMENT
EXT.P-9: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.2.2013

H.Anand v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

H.Anand 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

Sindhu.M Vs Addl.D.P.I.

Riju V.N Vs Kerala State Electricity Board

S.Muhammed Khalil Vs the District Collector

Shri. Mohammed Basheer Vs the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Inv.)

Ravi Vs District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

V.Rajagopalan Vs Malabar Devaswom Board