Kerala High Court
Rajamma A.G vs Revenue Divisional Officer on 6 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 16TH POUSHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
PETITIONER:
RAJAMMA A.G
AGED 66 YEARS
MINI BHAVAN, PERUMPETTY P.O., PERUMPETTY VILLAGE,
MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHATTA DISTRICT.
BY ADV SRI.K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA)
RESPONDENTS:
1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TEMPLE ROAD,
THIRUVALLA, PIN 689 101.
2 VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, PERUMPETTY, PIN - 689 592.
3 TAHASILDAR
MALLAPALLY TALUK OFFICE, MALLAPALLY, PATHANAMTHITTA,
PIN -689645.
4 A.G.RAVEENDRAN NAIR
PARRAKKALAYA ANAVATTATHU HOUSE, PERUMPETTY.P.O.,
PERUMPETTY VILLAGE, PIN -689592.
BY ADVS.
SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE
SRI.JAYKAR.K.S.
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.K.M FAISAL G.P
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
===================
WP(C) No. 14956 OF 2013
===================
Dated this the 6th day of January 2023
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers:
" i. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to implement
Exhibits P2 & P3 orders passed by the 1 st respondent within a
time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court;
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
writ, order or direction directing the 1 st Respondent to ensure the
compliance of directions in Exhibits P2 & P3 order by the 2 nd
respondent and to make sure that the mutation in respect of
petitioner's property may be effect in her name;.
iii. Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble
Court may deem fit to grant in the facts and circumstances of
the case." (SIC)
2. According to the petitioner, she is the owner in
possession and enjoyment of 10 cents of property in Sy.
No.113/11/1 by virtue of the will executed by her mother. It is
the case of the petitioner that, the said property was mistakenly
mutated in favour of her brother by the Revenue Officials and
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
when the mistake came to her notice, the petitioner submitted
the appeal so as to rectify the mistake and to get it mutated in
her favour. The first respondent passed Exts.P2 & P3 orders in
favour of the petitioner ordering the 2 nd respondent to take
appropriate steps to rectify the mistake and effect mutation in
favour of the petitioner in respect of the above said property. But
it is stated that, 2nd respondent has not acted upon the directions
of his superior, is the grievance raised by the petitioner. Hence,
this writ petition to effect mutation on the basis of Exts.P2 & P3
in a time bound manner.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the
learned Government Pleader, I also heard the learned Counsel
appearing for the additional 4th respondent.
4. The learned Government Pleader takes me through
paragraph 7 to 9 of the counter affidavit filed by the 2 nd
respondent. It will be better to extract para 7 to 9 of the counter
affidavit and the same is extracted hereunder;
" 7. It is submitted that Order No.B3-1218/13/
K.Dis dated 25.03.2013 passed by the Revenue Divisional
Officer which was produced before this Honourable Court as
Ext.P3 is partially executed. So mutation effected was by
mistake was cancelled. But further action for mutation both
the properties can be done only after reaching a conclusion
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
with regard to the extent of property comes under each
Survey Number and now the matter is pending before the
Mallapally Tahsildar for consideration. To the question of
mutation regarding this property can be finalized only after
clarifying the mistakes crept in the Will Deed and partition
Deed.
8. It is submitted that the petitioner demands
that her land comes in the Sy.No. 113/10 and it has to be
mutated in her favour. But Shri. Raveendran Nair claims
that the entire property in Sy.No.. 113/10 has to be
mutated in his favour. Both the parties claim the said land
is in their possession. But there is no any boundary
separating the alleged land. There is no description showing
the correct Sy.No. and area of the land for each party either
in the Partition Deed or in the will. Therefore, the 2nd
respondent has not effect the mutation as there is a dispute
between right over the alleged land in question. Hence the
suit.
9. It is submitted that there is no illegal or wrong
action from the part of Revenue Authorities. When the
Partition Deed and will were executed no specified Sy.Nos.
and area are entered for which each number of the deed
entitled. Hence the dispute come forth regarding the
mutation. The Partition Deed registered without specific
Sy.No. and area were mutated and subsequently upon the
petition regarding the mutation received and hence the
mutation cancelled by 1st respondent realizing the fact that
the mutation was wrong. There is the dispute between the
parties in the Partition Deed over th right of the alleged
land in question. There is no clarity in the area for each
Sy.No. So the maintenance has not been extended. Either
in the Partition Deed or in the will there is no specific area
noticed against each Survey numbers and there is a dispute
between the parties over the right of the alleged land in
question. Therefore the mutation has not been effected."
(SIC)
5. In the light of the above affidavit, no further order can
be passed in this case. If there is any further greivance, the
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
parties has to approach the civil court.
Therefore, recording the above affidavit, this writ petition is
closed. All other civil rights of the parties are left open.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SAAP
WP(C) NO. 14956 OF 2013
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14956/2013
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE WILL
NO.72/111/08 OF SUB REGISTRAR'S
OFFICE VENNIKKULAM.
EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
15/02/2013.
EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY
THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON
25/03/2013.
//True Copy// PA to Judge
