T.C. George vs The Tahasildar
2023 Latest Caselaw 2065 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 14TH MAGHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 3701 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

            T.C. GEORGE
            S/O. CHACKO, AGED 80 YEARS,
            RESIDING AT THURUTHUMMEL HOUSE, ERUMELY,
            KUMARAPURAM PO, KUNNATHUNADU,
            ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683 565.

            BY ADVS.
                    SHIJU VARGHESE
                    SACHU THOMAS


RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE TAHASILDAR
            KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNADU,
            PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683 542.

    2       THE VILLAGE OFFICER
            KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE, KUMARAPURAM PO,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 565.

    3       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
            CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 030.

    4       THE TAHASILDAR (LAND RECORDS)
            KUNNATHUNADUTALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHUNADU,
            PERUMBAVOOR, PIN - 683 542.

            BY ADV. C.S.SHEEJA (SR.G.P)



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.02.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.3701 OF 2023                    2




                              JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a senior citizen. He has approached the 2 nd

respondent with Ext.P1 request to effect mutation of property

on the basis of a Partition Deed executed in the year 1968.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

submits that despite the passage of nearly 16 months after the

filing of Ext.P1 application, the mutation has not been effected.

He prays that a direction may be issued to the 2nd respondent

to consider Ext.P1 application.

3. The learned Government Pleader submits that since

the petitioner is claiming mutation on the basis of a Partition

Deed executed in the year 1968 and since the petitioner has

not been paid land tax in his name for all these years, it is more

appropriate if a direction is issued to the 4th respondent to

consider the matter in accordance with law. It is also pointed

out that on the basis of Ext.P1 application, Ext.P2

communication has already been sent to the 1 st respondent, by

the 2nd respondent.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for

the respondents, it is directed that on the petitioner producing

copies of Exts.P1 and P2 along with a copy of this judgment

and also a copy of this writ petition before the 4 th respondent,

the 4th respondent shall take up the matter and take all steps

that may be necessary to complete the proceedings for

effecting mutation in favour of the petitioner in accordance

with law and after observing all formalities within a period of

three months. The petitioner shall produce the documents

directed to be produced before the 4 th respondent within 10

days from today.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE ats

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3701/2023

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 8.10.2021

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT FORWARDED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 11.10.2021