Unnikrishnan vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 8550 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST 2023 / 16TH SRAVANA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 23422 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

            UNNIKRISHNAN
            AGED 67 YEARS
            S/O GOPALAKRISHNA PILLA, VADAKKUPURATH (H),
            KODUNGALLOOR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680664
            BY ADVS.
            DEEPAK RAJ
            C.P.ROOPA


RESPONDENT/S:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REP BY ITS SECRETARY, REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT,
            SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 695001
    2       THE SUB REGISTRAR
            SUB-REGISTRAR OFFICE, MATHILAKOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT,
            PIN - 680644
            BY SMT.DEEPA V., GOVERNMENT PLEADER



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.08.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC No.23422 of 2022

                                       2




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being

aggrieved by the fact that possessory right over certain

property obtained by the petitioner under Ext.P1 from one

Shamsudheen is not being permitted to be transferred by

refusing registration of Ext.P3 document.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that the matter stands covered in favour of the

petitioner by the judgment of this Court in Sumathi and

Another v. State of Kerala and Others, [2018 (5) KHC 586]

where, this Court after referring to the judgment in W.P.

(C)No.2871 of 2018 held that even possessory title could be

conveyed. It is submitted that since the petitioner can only

convey the title that he has obtained, there cannot be any

reason for the Sub Registrar to refuse the registration of Ext.P3.

It is submitted that even the recitals in Ext.P3 will show that the

petitioner is only transferring his possessory title and nothing

more.

WPC No.23422 of 2022

3. The learned Government Pleader refers to the

counter affidavit filed in this case and submits that the

petitioner has purchased properties having an extent of 30.35

ares comprised in Sy.No.51/6-3 of Pappinivattam Village in

Kodungallur Taluk from one Shamsudheen. It is submitted that

the petitioner also obtained another extent of 10 ares and 52

sq.meters from the very same Shamsudheen through Ext.P1,

which itself shows that the aforesaid Shamsudheen had no title

to the said property. It is submitted that the only title

transferred to the petitioner was a possessory title and

therefore, Ext.P3 cannot be registered even if the petitioner had

been paying tax over the aforesaid extent of 10 ares and 52

sq.meters also.

4. Having heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing of the

respondents, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to

succeed. It is clear from Ext.P1 document pertaining to the

aforesaid 10 ares and 52 sq.meters of land comprised in Sy

No.51/6-2 of Pappinivattam Village in Kodungallur Taluk that the

petitioner obtained only possessory title over that extent

together with absolute title over 30 ares and 35 sq.meters of WPC No.23422 of 2022

land in Sy.No.51/6-3 of the very same village. A perusal of

Ext.P3 also shows that the petitioner only intends to convey the

very same possessory title which he obtained under Ext.P1.

Therefore, going by the law laid down by this Court in

Sumathi's case(supra) following the judgment in W.P.

(C)No.2871 of 2018, I am of the view that the second

respondent can be directed to register Ext.P3. It is clear from

Ext.P3 that only possessory title is being transferred and since

this Court has already taken the view that even possessory title

can be transferred, there cannot be any objection in registering

Ext.P3. Since Ext.P3 was presented before the second

respondent on 07.05.2022 (which is evident from Ext.P4), the

same shall be registered without treating the stamp papers as

invalid in any manner and taking the date of presentation as

07.05.2022.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P., JUDGE rkj WPC No.23422 of 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23422/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED NO:

3247 DATED 13.11.1997.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE YEAR 2022-2023 ISSUED BY THE PAPPINIVATTOM VILLAGE.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED PROPOSED TO BE REGISTERED DATED 06.05.2022 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 07.05.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT