Thayyil Ratnamma vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21903 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. 8434 OF 2020
PETITIONERS:

     1      THAYYIL RATNAMMA
            AGED 71 YEARS
            W/O.P.G.PRABHAKARAN NAIR, MANALODIYIL, NILAMBUR DESOM,
            NILAMBUR.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-679329

     2      JALAJAMANI
            AGED 47 YEARS
            D/O.THAYYIL RATNAMMA, MANALODIYIL, NILAMBUR DESOM,
            NILAMBUR.P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA PIN-679329

            BY ADV C.DILIP


RESPONDENTS:

     1      STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE
            DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
            PIN-685001

     2      DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
            CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM, PIN-676505

     3      SPECIAL TAHSILDAR
            (LAND REFORMS), MINI CIVIL STATION, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM
            DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN-676121

            BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER


OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT. SURYA BINOY- SR. 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. 8434 OF 2020
                                   2

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a

direction to the 3rd respondent to issue to them the certified

copies of the order in SM No.1283/1972; Certificate of

purchase No.426/1973 and the extract of the ledger, indicating

remittance of the purchase price and compensation, within a

time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioners say that even though they are in

ownership and enjoyment of the property covered by the afore

mentioned Purchase Certificate, they have irrecoverably lost

the same; and consequently, that they applied for its certified

copy before the 3rd respondent. They say that, however, the

third respondent has not yet acceded to their request and thus

pray that he be directed to do so at the earliest.

3. In response to the afore submissions of Sri. Dilip -

learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Senior

Government Pleader - Smt.Surya Binoy, took my attention to

the statement filed by the 3 rd respondent, to say me that the

documents in question have been irrecoverably lost even from WP(C) NO. 8434 OF 2020

the Revenue office concerned. She submitted that the reasons

for this have been explained in detail in the statement and

further submitted that the competent Authority will abide by

any direction to be issued by this Court, taking note of the

peculiar circumstances.

4. When I examine the statement dated 19/02/2021,

filed by the 3rd respondent, it is inevitable that the documents

in question cannot be reconstructed or retrieved because even

the files are stated to be not available. However, the

petitioners cannot be now left in the lurch, since admittedly,

they are enjoying a Purchase Certificate and it is without

contest that the documents now sought for by them ought to

have been maintained by the competent Authorities in terms of

law forever.

5. In the afore circumstances, I direct the petitioner to

appear before the 3rd respondent at 11.00. a.m. on

18/11/2021; who will thereupon, issue a certificate to them,

containing the details of the order in SM proceedings No. 1283

of 1972, as well as that in the Purchase Certificate No. WP(C) NO. 8434 OF 2020

426/1973, along with the details of remittance of purchase

price and compensation as per the relevant register. The said

certificate shall be attested by the 3 rd respondent, with an

endorsement that the original documents have been lost and

that the same can be used by the petitioner for all purposes,

in substitution of the originals.

6. The afore exercise shall be completed by the 3 rd

respondent as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than

one month from the date on which the petitioners approach

the said Authority in terms of the afore directions.

7. Needless to say, if any enquiries are required to be

done by the 3rd respondent for the afore purpose, the said

Authority will be at liberty to do so, but within a time frame

fixed above.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE ANB WP(C) NO. 8434 OF 2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8434/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF SALE DEED NO.4443/2000 OF NILAMBUR S.R.O. DATED 10.10.2000

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF LAND TAX RECEIPT SHOWING REMITTANCE OF TAX IN RESPECT OF 4.45 ARES LAND COVERED BY EXHIBIT P1 DATED 19.09.2019

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF LETTER DATED 19.09.2014 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF LAND TRIBUNAL, MANJERI

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 28.01.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE INFORMATION OFFICER AT THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.02.2020 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT