Sujatha vs Secretary, Changansserry ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9791 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
   FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 4TH BHADRA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 28653 OF 2012
PETITIONER/S:

    1       SUJATHA
            AGED 35 YEARS
            D/O.SANTHAKUMARI, ANANDA BHAVANAM, PERUNNA,
            CHANGANACHERRY.
    2       LEKHA
            D/O.SANTHAKUMARI, ANANDA BHAVANAM, PERUNNA,
            CHANGANACHERRY.
    3       REKHA
            D/O.SANTHAKUMARI, ANANDA BHAVANAM, PERUNNA,
            CHANGANACHERRY.
            BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHAJ
            SMT.ANJU MOHAN
            SRI.SAJJU.S
RESPONDENT/S:

    1       SECRETARY, CHANGANSSERRY MUNCIPALITY
            REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHANGANACHERRY.
            PIN-689121
    2       THE TAHSILDAR
            CHANGANACHERRY- 689 126
    3       VILLAGE OFFICER
            CHANGANACHERRY PIN - 689 126
            BY ADVS.
            SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
            GOVERNMENT PLEADER
            SRI.S.A.ABDUL SALEEM
            SRI.S.NANDAGOPAL
OTHER PRESENT:

            PAUL JACOB - SC FOR CHANGANASSERY MUNICIPALITY


     THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   26.08.2022,     THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.C. No. 28653 of 2012                         -2-




                          MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.,J.
                ................................................................
                          W.P.C. No. 28653 of 2012
                ...............................................................

                 Dated, this the 26th day of August, 2022

                                      JUDGMENT

The petitioners are stated to be in possession of 1.35 ares of

purambokku land in Changanassery Village from 1951 onwards and

had taken the same on lease under the kuthakappattam Rules , 1947

(Travancore), and they have been remitting the pattom since then.

Ext. P4 is a notice issued in the name of the late mother of the

petitioners claiming that the said property belongs to Changanassery

Municipality and that the petitioners are in iilegal possession of the

same. It is seen that the petitioners have given Ext. P5 as a reply to

Ext. P4. Petitioners submit that Ext. P4 is per se illegal.

2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader as well as

the learned Standing Counsel for the Municipality.

3. After hearing the learned counsel on either side, I am of

the view that the petitioners can take up all contentions against Ext.

P4 before the first respondent. Accordingly, there will be a direction

to the first respondent to consider the objections filed by the

petitioners to Ext. P4 notice and to take a final decision, after hearing

the petitioners and other affected parties, if any, within a period of

three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till

such decision is taken and communicated to the petitioners, the

interim order granted by this Court will be in force.

This Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE.

Ani/ /TRUE COPY/

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS' EXTS:

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF KUTHAKAPATTOM RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2009-2010 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENTS

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF EXTRACT OF THE KUTHAKAPATTOM REGISTER CERTIFIED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENTS

EXT.P3: TRUECOPY OF REPORT DATED 27-11-2000 SUBMITTED BY THE THIRD RESPSONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENTS

EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 2-11-2012 ADDRESSED TO THE LATE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONERS ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT

EXT. P5: TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 19-11-2012 SUBMITTED BY THE THIRD PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENTSEXT. P6: TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 19-11-2012 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO THE THIRD PETITIONER