Sherina Yousef vs The Sub Registrar
2021 Latest Caselaw 1794 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

     MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 28TH POUSHA, 1942

                      WP(C).No.36594 OF 2017(Y)


PETITIONER:

               SHERINA YOUSEF, ADATTIL HOUSE,
               PALAPPILLY P.O., KARIKULAM,
               THRISSUR - 680 304.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN
               SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR
               SMT.ASHA K.SHENOY
               SRI.T.C.KRISHNA
               SMT.PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212)
               SRI.PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE SUB REGISTRAR, KODALI,
               OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR,
               KODALI,THRISSUR 680 699.

      2        THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
               OFFICE OF THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
               CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR 680 307.

               R1 BY ADV. SRI.SANDESH RAJA.K. SPL. G.P. FOREST

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD        ON
18.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)No.36594/2017

                                  2



                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 18th day of January, 2021

The petitioner is before this Court seeking to quash

Ext.P5 and to declare that the 1 st respondent has no legal

authority to insist on getting a 'No Objection Certificate' from

the 2nd respondent for registering the sale deed in respect of

the petitioner's property covered by Ext.P1.

2. The petitioner purchased 31.50 cents of land in the

year 2007 as per Ext.P1 sale deed. The land was situated in

Sy. Nos. 620, 621 and 1063 of Varantharappilly Village. In

the year 2017, the petitioner proposed to sell 18.55 cents of

land out of the land covered by Ext.P1 sale deed.

Accordingly, Ext.P3 agreement for sale was executed on

27.09.2017. When the petitioner approached the Sub

Registrar for registering the sale deed, the Sub Registrar

required that a 'No Objection Certificate' from the Forest

Department is required.

WP(C)No.36594/2017

3. The petitioner in turn approached the Divisional

Forest Officer. The Divisional Forest Officer issued Ext.P5

letter declining grant of NOC to the petitioner. Ext.P5 was

issued on the ground that the petitioner has illegally

constructed a residential building in forest land at

Vellikulangara Range, Karikulam Desom producing fake

documents. It is aggrieved by the said Ext.P5, the petitioner

has approached this Court.

4. The Special Government Pleader (Forests) filed

statement and additional statement controverting the

contentions of the petitioner in the writ petition. The

statement filed by the respondents alleged that fraud was

committed by the petitioner and the petitioner had used

documents of lands in Sy. Nos. 620, 621 and 1063 to

construct a house and to avail other facilities in the leased

land of Harrison Malayalam Limited. The additional statement

further proceed to state that after encroaching into land, the

petitioner has sought for inclusion of her name in the list of WP(C)No.36594/2017

beneficiaries for construction of building under the 'Indira

Awaas Yojana'.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and

the learned Special Government Pleader.

6. The specific case of the petitioner is that the

encroachment alleged is not in the land covered by Ext.P1 or

Ext.P3 sale deeds. On the basis of allegation of

encroachment of forest lands in some other area, the

petitioner cannot be declined NOC to sell land legally

purchased by her. Going through the pleadings available in

the writ petition, it is evidenced that the petitioner has

purchased 31.50 cents of land as per Ext.P1 sale deed.

What is sought to be transferred by the petitioner as per

Ext.P3 is 18.55 cents of land purchased as per Exts.P1.

There is no material on record to show that the petitioner has

made any encroachment in respect of the property covered

by Exts.P1 and P3. Annexure R2(a) document produced by

the respondent would also establish this fact. In Annexure WP(C)No.36594/2017

R2(a), the Divisional Forest Officer has specifically stated that

the petitioner is in possession of lands in Sy. Nos. 620, 621

and 1063.

7. Going by the pleadings and the documents, it is

clear that there is no allegation of encroachment by the

petitioner in respect of the land covered by Exts.P1 and P3.

Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to relief in this writ petition.

8. Ext.P5 is therefore quashed. There will be a

direction to the 2nd respondent to issue NOC for the proposed

sale of land by the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P1 and P3 in

Sy. Nos. 620 and 621 of Varantharappilly Village. The 2 nd

respondent is directed to issue NOC within a period of two

weeks positively.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd WP(C)No.36594/2017

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF REGISTERED DOCUMENT DATED 9.1.2007 OF KODALI SUB REGISTRY.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PERIOD 2017-

             18   ISSUED    BY   THE    VILLAGE   OFFICER,
             VARANDARAPPILLY.

EXHIBIT P3   TRUE COPY    OF AGREEMENT  DATED 27.9.2017

ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND ONE ABDUL RAHIMAN.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 27.9.2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 24.10.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT EXTRACT FROM THE BTR MAINTAINED IN VARANTHARAPILLY VILLAGE

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN RESPECT OF THE LAND IN SY.NOS 620, 621/1 AND 1063 OF VARANTHARAPPILLY VILLAGE

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS ANNEXURE R2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 10.11.2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER

ANNEXURE R2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT AND SKETCH

ANNEXURE R2(c) TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 27.02.2013.

ANNEXURE R2(d) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25.10.2014 OF THE KODAKARA BLOCK