Kerala High Court
Nusaiba vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 24595 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
NUSAIBA
AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. MOIDEENKUNHI,RESIDING AT
IYVAD AMSOM, MANGAD DESOM, KOYILANDI TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI.VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN
SMT.M.MANJU
SRI.R.SUDHISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2 INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
3 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
WAYANAD DISTRICT, WAYANAD-673576
4 THE SUB REGISTRAR
VYTHIRI, WAYANAD-673576
BY ADV.
SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 24595 of 2016
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024.
JUDGMENT
According to the petitioner, he is the absolute owner in possession of 0.3900 hectors of land in Re-Survey No.141/2 in Block No.25 of Vythiri Village in Wayanad District. It is submitted that the Civil court declared that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the property as per Ext.P1 judgment. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 judgment became final. Thereafter, the petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.18148 of 2012 challenging the notice issued by the Village Officer, Kunnathidavaka directing the 4th respondent not to register the document presented by the W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 3 petitioner. Petitioner is the 14th petitioner in the above writ petition. This Court allowed the writ petition directing the 3rd respondent therein to collect tax and issue possession certificate to the petitioners therein. Ext.P3 in the said writ petition was quashed by this Court. Ext.P2 is the judgment in W.P.(C).No.18148 of 2012. Accordingly, the petitioner presented the assignment deed for registration and he purchased the stamp papers also. But the 4th respondent did not register the documents and returned the documents to the petitioner with an objection stating that the land sought to be registered is the Government property. Ext.P3 is the order of the 4th respondent. According to the petitioner, competent Civil court declared that the petitioners are the absolute owners of the property and the Government and its officers are W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 4 restrained from enjoying the property of the petitioners. Hence this Writ petition is filed with following prayers:
"i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P3 dated 21.4.2016 of the 4th respondent Sub Registrar, Vythiri.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4 th respondent to register the Assignment Document executed by the petitioner and others dated 19.4.2016 on a non judicial stamp worth Rs. 1,14,000/- forthwith.
iii. Issue such other writ, order or direction which this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. When this Writ petition came up for consideration on 26.07.2016, this Court passed the following order:
"Admit. Issue notice to the respondents.W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 5
There will be an interim order directing the fourth respondent to register the document, if any, presented by the petitioner in respect of the property covered by Ext.P1 judgment, if the petitioner has remitted stamp duty on the value shown in the document."
4. The State challenged the above interim order by filing Writ Appeal No.2048/2016. The above Writ Appeal was allowed in the light of the fact that R.S.A. No.1084/2016 was allowed by this Court by setting aside the order dismissing the delay petition to file an appeal. It will be better to extract the judgment dated 30.05.2018 in W.A.No.2048/2016:
The State is in appeal against an interim order dated 26.7.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 24595 of 2016. As per the impugned order, the following direction has been issued:
"There will be an interim order directing the fourth respondent to register the document, if any, presented by the W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 6 petitioner in respect of the property covered by Ext.P1 judgment, if the petitioner has remitted stamp duty on the value shown in the document."
2. This appeal was admitted on 20.10.2016 and an interim order of stay was granted by this Court. Therefore, the order appealed against has not been complied with.
3. The learned Government Pleader has handed over to us copy of the judgment dated 5.7.2017 of a learned Single Judge of this Court, allowing R.S.A. No. 1084 of 2016 filed by the State against Ext.P1 judgment referred to in the order appealed against. As per the said judgment, this Court has condoned a delay of two years and nine days in filing the first appeal against Ext.P1 judgment. The Second Appeal has been allowed and the lower appellate court has been directed to consider and dispose of the first appeal filed by the State against Ext.P1 judgment within a period of six months of the date of receipt of a copy of the said judgment.
4. What emerges from the above is that Ext.P1 judgment has not become final but that, the same is the subject matter of an appeal pending before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Sulthan Bathery. The order appealed against, has W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 7 obviously been passed on the assumption that Ext.P1 judgment had become final.
5. In view of the subsequent event noted above, this appeal is allowed, the interim order dated 26.7.2016 is vacated. The writ petition would have to be considered taking into account the above noted subsequent development also and disposed of on the merits. Copy of the judgment dated 5 th July, 2017 in R.S.A. No. 1084 of 2016 shall be retained as part of the records of this appeal."
In the light of the above judgment, I think the prayers in this Writ petition are infructuous. After disposal of the appeal suit filed against Ext.P1 judgment, the petitioner can proceed in accordance with law.
With the above observation, this Writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE DM W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24595/2016 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPYOF THE JUDGMENT IN OS. NO.
256 OF 2004 ON THE FILE OF THE MUNISFF'S COURT, KALPATTA DATED 29.9.2007 EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPYOF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC.NO.18148 OF 2012 DATED 19.8.2014 EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPYOF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 21.4.2016 REFUSING TO REGISTER THE DOCUMENT RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE