Kamalamayamma vs Tahasildar (Lr)
2021 Latest Caselaw 21840 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:

    1     KAMALAMAYAMMA
          AGED 67 YEARS
          D/O. GOPALAN NAIR, KANNAMATH VADAKATHIL,
          AMBALTHUMBHAGOM MURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTAH,
          KOLLAM 690 520

    2     LEKSHMIKUTTY AMMA
          AGED 90, W/O. GOPALAN NAIR, KANNAMATH VADAKATHIL,
          AMBALTHUMBHAGOM MURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTAH,
          KOLLAM 690 520

    3     VIJAYAN PILLAI
          AGED 64, S/O. GOPALAN NAIR, KANNAMATH VADAKATHIL,
          AMBALTHUMBHAGOM MURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTAH,
          KOLLAM 690 520

    4     RATNAKUMARI
          D/O. GOPALAN NAIR, KANNAMATH VADAKATHIL,
          AMBALTHUMBHAGOM MURI, PORUVAZHY VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTAH,
          KOLLAM 690 520

          BY ADV ARUN BABU



RESPONDENTS:

    1     TAHASILDAR (LR)
          TALUK OFFICE, SASTHAMCOTTAH TEMPLE ROAD, KUNNATHOOR,
          KOLLAM 691 305

    2     VILLAGE OFFICER
          VILLAGE OFFICE, NEDIYAVILA, KUNNATHOOR , KOLLAM 690 521

    3     KUNNATHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KUNNATHOOR EAST P.O, KUNNATHOOR,
          KOLLAM 690 521, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

          BY ADVS.
   WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021


                                    2

           K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.)
           P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM)
           S.VIBHEESHANAN
           S.K.ADHITHYAN
           SABU PULLAN
           GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN
           K.SUDHINKUMAR


           SMT.RESMITHA RAMACHANDRAN G.P




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021


                                    3

                                JUDGMENT

The petitioners say that the 2nd among them

is the mother of the others and that her

husband and the father of the others - late

Gopalan Nair, owned 60 cents of property,

comprised of in Sy.No.747-b-2 of the

Kunnathoor Village, as per a Partition Deed.

They say that a claim was made on the said

property by the 3rd respondent - Grama

Panchayat, which led to O.S.No.377/1991 being

filed by the aforementioned late Gopalan Nair

and that it was allowed through Ex.P1 decree,

which finally culminated in its delivery in

their favour, through Court Amin, on

13.03.2019.

2. They say that, however, when they

applied for transfer of Registry of the WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

property in their favour and for permission to

remit land tax on it, the 3rd respondent

objected to it by saying that they have filed

O.S.No.74/2019 seeking restitution of the

property. The petitioners assert that merely

because the 3rd respondent has filed a suit

before a competent Civil Court, it could not

have been used as a reason by the Tahsildar to

refuse transfer of Registry in their favour

because the law is now well settled that title

to a property does not depend upon solely on

such transfer, but on various other

attributes, which have to be proved and

established by the 3rd respondent before the

competent Civil Court, in the pending suit.

They thus pray that the 1st respondent -

Tahsildar be directed to effect transfer of

Registry of the property, which is covered by

Ext.P1 decree in their favour, taking note of WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

Ext.P7 Will executed by the aforementioned

late Gopalan Nair.

3. Dr.K.P.Satheesan - learned Senior

Counsel instructed by Sri.S.K.Adhithyan -

learned counsel appearing for the 3rd

respondent, affirmed that though O.S.74/2019

had been filed by his client, no interdictory

orders have been obtained by them against the

petitioners' request for transfer of Registry

of the property in question or for remittance

of the land tax thereon. He, however, added

that should O.S.No.74/2019 end in favour of the

3rd respondent - Panchayat, then the petitioners

would be left without any title over the

property and thus prayed that this Court allow

the official respondents not to act on their

request until such time as the said suit is

disposed of.

4. I must say that I cannot find favour WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

with the afore submissions of Dr.K.P.Satheesan,

learned Senior Counsel, because the law is now

to well settled - without requirement of any

restatement - that merely because of the suit

is pending, it would not inhibit the official

respondents from considering the request of the

petitioners for transfer of Registry or for

remittance of land tax on the property in

question. This is because, as I have already

said above, mere transfer of Registry or

remittance of land tax would not be the sole

conclusive proof of title over a property,

which have to be established on the touchstone

of the relevant and germane inputs, as are

required in law.

5. In the case at hand, since the

Panchayat only says that they have filed O.S.

No.74/2019, but concedes that they have not

obtained any interdictory orders against the WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

petitioners, I see no reason for the 1st

respondent to have refused their request for

transfer of Registry or remittance of land tax,

over the property in question.

In the afore circumstances, I order this

writ petition and direct the 1st respondent to

immediately accede to the request of the

petitioners for transfer of Registry of the

property and for remittance of land tax thereon

- if there are no other legal impediments

standing in the way - as expeditiously as is

possible, but not later than two weeks from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

I make it clear that merely on account of

the afore directions, the petitioners could not

get any special right - either in equity or in

law - and they will abide by any decree or

judgment to be issued by the competent Court in

O.S.No.74/2019, subject to their available WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

remedies; making it further clear that if the

said suit is to end in favour of the Panchayat,

then the transfer of Registry and the

permission to remit the land tax in favour of

the petitioners can be withdrawn by the

competent Authorities, after following due

procedure and after hearing them at that time.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/03/11/2021 WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14925/2021

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN O.S 66/1992 OF MUNSIFF COURT SASTHAMCOTTA DATED 31-07-1998

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 15-03-2006 IN RSA 502/2005 AND RSA 597/2005 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 21-01-2018 IN RSA 1140/2017

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02-04-

2019 IN RSA 1140/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 13-03-2019 FILED BY THE COURT AMEEN IN EP 12/2013 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, SASTHAMCOTTAH

Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19-03-2019 IN EP 12/2013 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT SASTHAMCOTTAH.

Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE WILL BEARING NUMBER 27/1996 DATED 03-08-1996 OF KUNNATHOOR SRO.

Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 12-04-2019 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT, SASTHAMCOTTAH

Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20-01-2020 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEARING NUMBER C2-755/2020.

Exhibit P10 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08-11-2019 ISSUED BY ADV. VINAYAKUMAR TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P11 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14-11-2019 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND WP(C) NO. 14925 OF 2021

RESPONDENT BEARING NUMBER B1/7384/2019

Exhibit P12 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.A 2396/2016 DATED 07-07-2017.