Sasikumar S vs The Sub Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 3454 Ker

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                     PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

          TUESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1944

                             WP(C) NO. 6057 OF 2022

PETITIONER:

               SASIKUMAR S.
               AGED 39 YEARS
               S/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR, MARAYOOR COLONY, SAHAYAGIRI P. O.,
               MARAYOOR, SAHAYAGIRI, IDUKKI DISTRICT, KERALA - 685 620.

               BY ADVS.
               M.R.DHANIL
               JISHY P.S.



RESPONDENTS:

     1         THE SUB COLLECTOR
               REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DEVIKULAM,
               IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.

     2         THE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICER
               OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEVIKULAM,
               IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 613.


OTHER PRESENT:

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




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.03.2022,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 6057 OF 2022

                                        2




                                JUDGMENT

When this matter was called today, the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Senior Government Pleader -

Smt.K.Amminikutty, were ad idem that issues in these cases have

been answered in favour of the petitioner at least in two judgments

delivered by this Court i.e. W.P.(C)Nos.16362/2020 and 31673/2019.

2. When I examine the afore mentioned precedents, it is

clear that all the issues impelled in this writ petition have been

considered and answered in favour of the petitioner by this Court.

3. I am, therefore, of the firm view that the petitioner herein

is also entitled to the benefit as ordered therein.

Resultantly, I dispose of this writ petition directing the 2 nd

respondent - Sub Registrar to register the title documents of the

petitioner, as and when it is presented before him, subject to

verification as to whether he has title and possession over the

properties covered by it.

The afore exercise shall be completed by the 2 nd respondent, as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three weeks from the

date on which the sale documents are presented before him by the

petitioner in terms of the directions.

At this time, Sri.M.R.Dhanil, learned counsel for the petitioner,

pointed out that, in fact, one of the reasons stated by the Registrar in WP(C) NO. 6057 OF 2022

refusing to register the document is that Ext.P3 order has been issued

by the Sub Collector, wherein, the transfer of sugarcane field is

interdicted. He submitted that, Sub Collector has no power to have

issued such an order.

It is needless to say that since this Court has already considered

the issue in the judgment in the aforementioned W.P.

(C)No.16362/2020, the declarations contained therein would apply in

its full force to this case also.

sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE rp WP(C) NO. 6057 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6057/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2334/2009 DATED 07.12.2009.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NO.KL06010902617/2021 DATED 14.09.2021.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 02.08.2019.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.6601/2021 DATED 13.09.2021.