Johny Thomas vs The Village Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 18317 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 16TH BHADRA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          JOHNY THOMAS,
          AGED 54 YEARS
          S/O. THOMAS, EDAKKATTU, NILAMBUR TALUK, CHERUMBU P.O.
          KALKKUNDY 6765 233.

          BY ADVS.
          K.R.VINOD
          M.S.LETHA
          K.S.SREEREKHA
          JACQUELINE JACKSON



RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
          KERALA ESTATE VILLAGE, KERALA ESTATE P.O. 676 525.

    2     THE TAHSILDAR,
          NILAMBUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR 679 329.

          BY ADV SRI.ASWIN SETHUMADHAVAN, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021
                                    2



                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to be the owner of a property covered

by Ext.P1 Gift Deed and alleges that even though he presented the

same for Transfer of Registry in his name, before the 1 st

respondent - Village Officer, said Authority has refused to do so

or to even accept the land tax from him. The petitioner, therefore,

prays that 1st respondent be directed to issue appropriate orders on

his application for Transfer of Registry and payment of tax, within

a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. Sri.K.R.Vinod - learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, submitted that, as is evident from Ext.P2, the tax with

respect to the property had been accepted from the predecessor-

in-interest of his client in the past; and added that his client

understands that 1st respondent has refused to take action on his

application only because the property in question comes within

the confines of the Kerala Estate Village, Nilambur Taluk. He

submitted that this objection raised by the 1 st respondent is not

tenable, since several judgments have been issued by this Court in WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021

favour of persons like his client and points out in substantiation to

Ext.P3. He, therefore, reiteratingly prayed that this writ petition

be allowed.

3. In response, the learned Senior Government Pleader -

Sri.Ashwin Sethumadhavan, conceded that Ext.P1 is a Gift Deed

and, therefore, that the application of the petitioner is competent

to be considered by the 1st respondent. He, however, submitted

that he does not have instructions as to why the 1 st respondent has

not acted in terms of the petitioner's application; but admitted, to a

pointed question, that this Court has already concluded in Ext.P3

judgment that persons like the petitioner are entitled to seek

Transfer of Registry and payment of tax with respect to the

properties, which included in the Kerala Estate Village, Nilambur

Taluk. He submitted that, therefore, he leaves it to this Court to

issue appropriate orders.

4. When I consider the afore submissions, there is no

doubt that the petitioner's request for Transfer of Registry and

payment of tax has not yet been rejected by the 1 st respondent. WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021

The petitioner has approached this Court with an apprehension

that it will be so.

5. However, going by Ext.P3 judgment, I cannot find the

apprehension to be tenable because, this Court has already

considered the issue as regards the properties relating to the

Kerala Estate Village, Nilambur Taluk; and am, therefore, of the

firm view that 1st respondent must be directed to consider the

petitioner's application, both for Transfer of Registry and

acceptance of tax, adverting to Ext.P2 tax receipt and to the

declarations in Ext.P3 judgment.

Resultantly, this writ petition is allowed and the 1st

respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioner,

for Transfer of Registry and acceptance of tax, adverting to

Exts.P2 tax receipt and Ext.P3 judgment, as expeditiously as is

possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, the afore directions have been issued

without prejudice to the rights of the respondents to proceed WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021

against the property in question as per law, after following due

procedure, if it becomes so warranted in future.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/07/09/20212 WP(C) NO. 18115 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18115/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED NO. 995/.2021/I DATED 23.04.2021 OF SRO KARUVARAKUNDU.

Exhibit P2 THE COPY OF THE LAND TAX PAYMENT RECEIPT DATED 12.02.2201 OF KERALA ESTATE VILLAGE

Exhibit P3 THE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.

15935/2020, WPC NO. 7262/2021 , WPC NO.

20043/2020 AND WPC NO. 25422/2020 DATED 28.06.2021.