Y2J.Varkey vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 5289 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
     MONDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF APRIL 2023 / 4TH VAISAKHA, 1945
                          RSA NO. 771 OF 2004
     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.12.2002 IN AS 309/2001 OF
     ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, KOTTAYAM FROM THE DECREE AND
         JUDGMENT IN OS 156/1993 OF MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR
APPELLANTS/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

             K.J.VARKEY, S/O JOSEPH, KALLUVATTAMKUZHIYIL,
             MANNANAM KARA, ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE (SR.)
             SRI.FRANCIS JOSEPH KURISINKAL
             SMT.V.A.GANGUJA
             SRI.SIJO GEORGE
             SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J.


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

     1       THE STATE OF KERALA
             REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

     2       THE TAHSILDAR KOTTAYAM.

     3       DALIS GEORGE, S/O.VAKKACHAN,
             MANACKAKADAVIL HOUSE, MANNANAM KARA,, ATHIRAMPUZHA
             VILLAGE.

     4       M.G.SURESH, S/O.SEKHARA PILLAI
             MANACKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, MANNANAM KARA,, ATHIRAMPUZHA
             VILLAGE.

     5       SPECIAL GRADE PANCHAYATH
             ATHIRAMPUZHA, REP. BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,,
             ATHIRAMPUZHA.

             ADV. SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE GP


         THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   24.04.2023,    THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 RSA NO. 771 OF 2004

                                 ..2..


                         J U D G M E N T

The plaintiff, in a suit for declaration and

injunction, is the appellant in this second

appeal. The defendant is the State and its

officials. Apparently, there exists some

disputes regarding identity of the property. The

trial court dismissed the suit. In appeal, the

appellant filed an application to withdraw the

suit with liberty to approach the revenue

officials to correct the survey records and a

further liberty to file a fresh suit based on the

outcome of the decision in the proceedings before

the revenue officials. These applications have

been dismissed.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant

only seeks permission to withdraw the suit with

liberty to approach the revenue officials for the

correction of the survey records. It is

submitted that if the appellant is not satisfied RSA NO. 771 OF 2004

..3..

with the outcome of the proceedings before the

revenue officials, he may be given liberty to

approach the Civil Court again. The learned

Government Pleader opposed the prayers.

3. Having adverted to the request of the

plaintiff, I am of the view that the request of

the plaintiff can be acceded inasmuch as that

according to the plaintiff there exists some

anomalies in the revenue records. If that be so,

the plaintiff is permitted to withdraw the suit

with liberty to approach the revenue authority

for rectifying the anomalies exists in the

revenue records and with a further liberty to

approach the Civil Court to institute a fresh

suit in the subject matter of the suit if the

plaintiff is not satisfied with the outcome of

the proceedings of the revenue authority.

The appeal stands disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE PR