Rajesh Gopalakrishnan vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 3802 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 15TH CHAITHRA, 1944
                    WP(C) NO. 399 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:

    1     RAJESH GOPALAKRISHNAN
          AGED 55 YEARS
          S/O.V.G.PODUVAL, CHANDRAVILLA, EAST FORT DESOM,
          THRISSUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
          PIN - 680 002.

    2     GEETHANJALI RAJESH
          AGED 49 YEARS
          W/O.RAJESH, GOPALAKRISHNAN, CHANDRAVILLA, EAST FORT
          DESOM, THRISSUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR
          DISTRICT, PIN - 680 002.

          BY ADV ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT
          OF REGISTRATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

    2     INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
          OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
          VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 035.

    3     THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL)
          THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR,
          CHEMBUKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001.

    4     THE SUB REGISTRAR
          THRISSUR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEPARTMENT OF
          REGISTRATION, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 020.

    5     KAMAKSHY CONSTRUCTIONS
          PAZHAYANNADAKAVU, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 001,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, R.PARAMESWARAN,
          AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.P.RAMASWAMI, KATTUPARAMBUMADOM,
          METHALA DESOM, KODUNGALOOR TALUK, THRISSUR.
 WP(C) NO. 399 OF 2022            2

     6     R.PARAMESWARAN
           AGED 60 YEARS
           P.RAMASWAMI, KATTUPARAMBUMADOM, METHALA DESOM,
           KODUNGALOOR TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN - 680 669.

           BY ADV RAHUL VENUGOPAL



OTHER PRESENT:

          SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY.SR.G.P.




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   05.04.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 399 OF 2022                  3

                                 JUDGMENT

All which the petitioners require in this case is

that the 4th respondent - Sub Registrar be directed not

to allow the 5th and 6th respondents to register any

property which is covered by Exts.P2,P4 and P5 orders

of attachment by the competent Civil Court.

2. In response to the afore request of the

petitioners, as made by their learned counsel -

Shri.Anchal C.Vijayan, the learned counsel appearing

for respondents 5 and 6 - Shri.Rahul Venugopal,

submitted that Ext.P2 order is not in force now, while

Ext.P4 has been modified. He then argued that the

attachment obtained by the petitioners is only with

respect to a small extent of 4.5 cents, while they are

trying to interdict his clients from dealing with a

larger extent of nearly 24 cents. He, therefore,

prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

3. The learned Senior Government Pleader,

Smt.K.Amminikutty submitted that the controversy in

question is squarely with respect to certain orders of

attachment issued by the competent Civil Court. She

submitted that, therefore, unless the Sub Registrar is

able to convince himself cogently that the documents

sought to be registered by respondents 5 and 6 are not

covered by the same, he will not be in a position to

act as per law.

4. I must say that I find substantial force in

the afore submissions of the learned Senior Government

Pleader because, if there are orders of attachments

subsisting on the property, transactions with respect

to the same cannot be allowed, unless it is permitted

by the Court which issued them. Therefore, the acme

question is as to the sweep of the said orders and as

to whether they are in force or modified, as asserted

by respondents 5 and 6.

5. However, this is not a matter that this Court

can look into at this stage, while acting under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India. I am,

therefore, certain that parties must approach the Sub

Registrar with all documents and evidence in their

possession to establish and substantiate their rival

plea, consequent to which said Authority will have to

act as per law.

Resultantly, I order this writ petition, leaving

liberty to respondents 5 and 6 to present any document

that they intend to register before the 4th respondent

- Sub Registrar; in which event, said Authority will

immediately notify the petitioners and hear them,

after analyzing the documents to be produced before

him by the rival sides; thus culminating in an

appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as

expeditiously as is possible, but without any

avoidable delay.

I make it clear that I have not considered the

contentions of the rival parties on its merits and

that they are all left open to be decided

appropriately by the Sub Registrar, as and when the

afore exercise is initiated.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/5.4

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 399/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONERS WITH RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 DATED 12/09/2012.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE ATTACHMENT PASSED BY SUB COURT, THRISSUR IN I.A.NO.2472/2014 IN OS NO.113/2014, DATED 07/04/2014.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION ALONG WITH SCHEDULE OF PROPERTIES IN IA NO.556/2015 IN O.S.NO.113/2014 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, THRISSUR.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.556/2015 IN O.S.NO.113/2014, DATED 13/03/2015.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.3942/2016 IN CMA NO.63/2016 DATED 18/08/2016 PASSED BY THE 3RD ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT, THRISSUR.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 12/04/2016 IN O.S.NO.113/2014 ON THE FILES OF 1ST ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, THRISSUR.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE SUB COURT, THRISSUR.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.2119/2016 IN R.F.A.NO.546/2016 PASSED BY THIS HON/'BLE COURT.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE VALUATION REPORT OF PROPERTIES IN SY.NOS.32/2 AND 32/1 OF ARNATTUKARA VILLAGE AND SY.NOS.1524/1 AND 1524/6 OF THRISSUR VILLAGE SUBMITTED BY THE JUDGMENT DEBTORS/RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6 IN E.P.NO.244/2016 IN O.S.NO.113/2014 ON THE FILES OF SUB COURT, THRISSUR.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION ALONG WITH

POSTAL RECEIPT SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/12/2021.

Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 28.06.2021 IN E.A. NO.725/2017 IN E.P. NO.244/2016 IN O.S. NO.113/2014 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

Exhibit R6(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN FAO 119/2016 DATED 02.06.2016 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM

Exhibit R6(b) TRUE COPY OF THE INJUNCTION ORDER DATED 17.10.16 IN I.A. NO. 3942/2016 IN CMA 63/2016 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT THRISSUR.

Exhibit R6(c) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 4595/201 DATED 09.12.2015

Exhibit R6(d) TRUE COPY OF THE CALCULATION OF UNDIVIDED SHARE WITH RESPECT TO THE BUILDING IN THE 9CENTS DATED NIL.

Exhibit R6(e) TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE SEPARATE ENTRANCE TO THE PORTION OF THE BUILDING STANDING IN THE ATTACHED PROPERTY.

Exhibit R6(f) TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL INTEREST CERTIFICATE DATED 20.03.2014