Kerala High Court
Varikkottil Moidutty Haji vs The Special Tahsildar (La) (Nh) on 17 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 9578 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
VARIKKOTTIL HAMZA
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. SAIDALAVI, VARIKKODAN HOUSE, P.O.PUNNATHALA,
RANDATHANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676510.
BY ADVS.
K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA)(NH)
UNIT II, VALAKKULAM P.O., KOZHICHENA, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT-676508.
*ADDL. R2 THE PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MAVELIPURAM,
KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM.
*(ADDL.R2 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
14/09/2021 IN WP(C)NO.9578/2021)
Sri Aswin Sethumadhavan Sr GP
Shri.Mathews K.Philip - SC NHAI
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 9578 & 9626/2021 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 9626 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
VARIKKOTTIL MOIDUTTY HAJI
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. SAIDALAVI, VARIKKODAN HOUSE, P.O.PUNNATHALA,
RANDATHANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676510.
BY ADVS.
K.K.MOHAMED RAVUF
SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA) (NH)
UNIT II, VALAKKULAM P.O., KOZHICHENA, MALAPPURAM
DISTRICT-676508.
*2 ADDL R2, PROJECT DIRECTOR,
NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, MAVELIPURAM,
KAKKANAD .
*(ADDL R2 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED
14-09-2021 IN WP(C)9626/2021.)
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 9578 & 9626/2021 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in these two cases - which have
been heard together, taking note of the similarity
of the factual circumstances and reliefs sought for
- are stated to be the brothers owning two extents
of land, which have been taken over for the
construction of a National Highway. They say that
even though they were the exclusive owners in
possession of the properties, until they were
dispossessed, the 1st respondent - Special Tahsildar
is refusing to disburse to them eligible amounts
under the Award, solely saying that they have not
produced the original of their title documents.
2. The petitioners say that on account of
some unavoidable circumstances, the original of
the title deeds had been lost irretrievably; and
consequently that they have applied for and
obtained Ext.P1 certified copies of the same from
the office of the Sub Registrar, Kottakkal. The
petitioners say that, therefore, refusal of the
1st respondent to disburse the amounts under the
Award is illegal and unlawful.
3. The afore submissions of Shri.K.K.Mohamed
Ravuf, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners, were met by the learned Standing
Counsel for the 2nd respondent - National Highway
Authority of India(NHAI), Shri.Mathews K.Philip,
by saying that the competent Authority can
disburse the amounts under the Awards to the
petitioners, provided they notify in a local news
paper about the loss of their original documents.
He submitted that this is intended to ensure that
a rival or competing claim is not raised with
respect to the property in question.
4. However, in reply, Shri.K.K.Mohamed Ravuf
submitted that since public notices under Section
3G of the National Highway Act have already been
published by the Authorities, it would not be
necessary for his clients to make a fresh
notification, particularly when, under Section 37
of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency
in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013, the District Collector has
already issued a Public Notice of the Award. He
submitted that, therefore, if there were any
competing claims, it would have already reached
the competent Authorities and the fact that this
has not happened, clearly indicates that his
clients have unquestioned and uncontested title
over the property.
5. I find substantial force in the
submissions of the learned counsel for the
petitioners and am of the view that, therefore,
they are entitled to relief in these writ
petitions; however, they must sufficiently
indemnify the respondents against any claim that
may arise in future.
Resultantly, I allow these writ petitions and
direct the competent among the respondents to
immediately disburse the amounts under the Award
relating to the properties of the petitioners,
based on Ext.P1 certified copies of their original
title deeds, after obtaining from them a letter in
writing that they will indemnify them from any
claim made by any person in future with respect to
the said properties.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/20.9
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9578/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED NO.1523/1985
OF KOTTAKKAL SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PRIOR TITLE DEED
NO.1041/1956 OF SRO, KOTTAKKAL.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.12.2020
OF THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20.1.2021
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
25.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
MARAKKARA TO THE BROTHER OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.3.2021
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9626/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED NO.1524/1985
OF KOTTAKKAL SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PRIOR TITLE DEED
NO.1041/1956 OF SRO, KOTTAKKAL.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.12.2018
OF THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 20.1.2021
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED
25.1.2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
MARAKKARA TO THE BROTHER OF THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.3.2021
ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
