Tessy Reena vs The Village Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 18199 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 12TH BHADRA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          TESSY REENA,
          D/O.CHACKO, POONATTU HOUSE, EDAKKUNNAM VILLAGE,
          KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT AERATHEDATHU
          HOUSE, CHIRAKKADAVU P.O., CHIRAKKADAVU VILLAGE,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.C.R.SYAMKUMAR
          SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL
          SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH
          SRI.K.ARJUN VENUGOPAL
          SRI.ASWIN KUMAR M J
          SMT.HELEN P.A.
          SRI.ARUN ROY



RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
          EDAKKUNNAM VILLAGE, PARATHODE P.O., KANJIRAPPALLY
          TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 512.

    2     THE TAHSILDAR, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK,
          KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK OFFICE, KANJIRAPPALLY P.O.,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 507.

    3     JACOB POONATTU,
          S/O.CHACKO, RESIDING AT POONATTU HOUSE, PARATHODU P.O.,
          EDAKKUNNAM VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK, KOTTAYAM
          DISTRICT, PIN-686 512.

    4     SHINI SEBASTIAN,
          W/O.JACOB POONATTU, RESIDING AT POONATTU HOUSE,
          PARATHODU P.O., EDAKKUNNAM VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY
          TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 512.

          SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
          SRI.RAJEE P MATHEWS
          SMT.BINDU MOHAN
          SMT.AMRUTHA K P
          SMT.AMRUTHA P S
 WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021
                                  2


            SRI.VIJAY SANKAR V.H.

           SRI ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN- SR. GOVERNMENT
           PLEADER




      THIS    WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   03.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021
                                   3


                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims certain extent of property under

Ext.P1 Will - which is a registered document bearing

No.2707/2002 of the Kanjirappilly SRO - which, she says,

had been settled by her deceased father.

2. The petitioner says that even though the property

bequeathed upon the legal heirs on the strength of the said

Will, certain disputes were raised by his siblings, namely

respondents 3 and 4, not with respect to the title but with

respect to other ancillary issues and that concedes that civil

suits are pending before the competent Civil Court relating

to it. She submits that, however, this will not reflect in any

manner on her claim for title over the property in question

and that she, therefore, preferred an application before the

2nd respondent - Tahsildar, for Transfer of Registry of the

same in her favour; but alleges that the same has not been

considered by the said respondent, without citing any

reason, but presumably because there are civil suits

pending.

3. The petitioner, therefore, prays that the 2 nd WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021

respondent be directed to take up the application preferred

by her for Transfer of Registry and issue appropriate orders

thereon without any further delay.

4. In response, the learned Senior Government Pleader

submitted that the 2nd respondent - Tahsildar is

incapacitated from acting upon the application for Transfer

of Registry made by the petitioner because there are Civil

Suits pending between her and her siblings. He pointed out

to Exts.P6 and P7 plaints in substantiation and submitted

that unless the said suits are disposed of by the competent

Civil Court appropriately, the 2nd respondent cannot take a

decision, as requested by the petitioner.

5. Even when I hear the the learned Senior

Government Pleader as afore, the fact remains that it is the

specific assertion of the petitioner that Exts.P6 and P7 do

not relate to the title of the property in question but only to

certain other ancillary issues.

6. I am, therefore, of the firm view that the 2 nd

respondent must hear the petitioner, as also respondents 3

and 4 and take a decision on the application of the former

with respect to the Transfer of Registry of the property in WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021

question, also adverting to the contents of Exts.P6 and P7

suits. It is so ordered.

7. Needless to say, the 2 nd respondent will be obligated

to verify whether Exts.P6 and P7 create any cloud on the

title of the petitioner, based on Ext.P1 Will; and then decide

whether the Transfer of Registry will require to be allowed

in her favour.

The afore exercise shall be completed by the 2 nd

respondent, after affording the afore directed opportunities

of being heard to both sides; thus culminating in an

appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible,

but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 13328 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13328/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO.136/2010 DATED 16.06.2010.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN OP(RM) 2/2019 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KATTAPPANA DATED 22.08.2019.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER IN OP(RM) 2/2019 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KATTAPPANA DATED 18.12.2019.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME 1312/2019 OF KANJIRAPPALLY POLICE STATION DATED 24.09.2019.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.09.2019.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS 264/2019 DATED 22.10.2019.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN OS 324/2019 DATED 27.11.2019.