Saimon Selvaraj vs District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 5577 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 5TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 27631 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

           SAIMON SELVARAJ
           AGED 55 YEARS
           S/O.SELVARAJ, SHYLA BHAVAN,
           NETAJI COLONY, GUNDUMALA, CHINNAKKANAL,
           SOORYANELLI.P.O,
           IDUKKI DISTRICT-685618.
           BY ADVS.
           GEORGE ABRAHAM
           JOBY DANIEL JOSEPH


RESPONDENTS:

     1       DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             COLLECTORATE, PAINAV,
             IDUKKI DISTRICT-685602.
     2       THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
             REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI-685613.
     3       THE TAHSILDAR,
             UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685554.
     4       THE VILLAGE OFFICER,CHINNAKKANAL VILLAGE,
             (VIA)UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685554.
OTHER PRESENT:

             SMT.K AMMINIKUTTY SR GP


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   26.05.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 27631 OF 2021            2

                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner seeks that the respondents be directed to transfer

registry of the property covered by Ext.P1 - Sale Deed in his favour,

within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. Shri.Joby Daniel Joseph - learned counsel for the petitioner,

pointed out that his client had purchased the property from a certain

Shri.Marimuthu through Ext.P1 - Sale Deed and that the latter had

obtained it validly in the year 1994 through Ext.P2 - Patta. He

submitted that, therefore, his client's title over the property is

unimpeached and consequently that its transfer of Registry ought to

have been conceded to by the respondents. He, therefore,

reiteratingly prayed that the said Authority be directed to do so

without any further delay.

3. In response, the learned Senior Government Pleader -

Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that though Ext.P2 - Patta was

issued in favour of the afore mentioned Shri.Marimuthu, no

Thandaper Account had been assigned to him and, consequently

that, the transfer of the same in favour of the petitioner has now

become difficult. She added that there are also enquiries pending

with respect to the genuineness of Ext.P2- Patta, along with various

others in the locality, and that unless such are completed, the request

of the petitioner for transfer of Registry of the property cannot be

acceded to.

4. When I hear the learned Senior Government Pleader on the

afore lines it is evident that there is no substantiated input against the

petitioner qua his title over the property in question. There is only a

suspicion that Ext.P2 may be bogus, since there was such documents

detected in the past in the locality. The learned Senior Government

Pleader says that an enquiry is still pending into the same.

Obviously, therefore, such enquiry will have to be completed at the

earliest, so that the assignment of Thandaper in favour of the

petitioner can be done, leading to its transfer of Registry being

completed as per law.

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the 3 rd

respondent - Tahsildar to complete proceedings with respect to the

application of the petitioner for transfer of Registry of the property

covered by Exts.P1 and P2 in his favour, which shall be done after

following due procedure and after affording an opportunity of being

heard to him, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four

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

I make it clear that I am affording four months time to the

Tahsildar to act as afore solely because the said time can be used by

the competent Authorities to complete the enquiry, if any, pending

against Exts.P2 - Patta in the meanwhile.

Therefore, it is also further clarified if such enquiry is not

completed within the afore time frame, the Tahsildar will be

obligated to act as per the above directions notwithstanding the

same.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/26.5

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27631/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED NO.22/9/2011. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF MARIMUTHU, DATED 13/7/1994.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION SUBMITTED IN FORM NO.1 BY THE PETITIONER DATED 23/9/2011.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI DATED 4/2/2021.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT DATED 4/2/2021.