Sasikumar vs The State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 6114 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
        FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 17077 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

            SASIKUMAR
            AGED 54 YEARS
            S/O. GOPALAKRISHNAN, RESIDING AT NANDANAM, MRA - 6,
            KURISSADI PADINJATTATHIL, MUNDAKKAL, KOLLAM, PIN -
            691014

            BY ADV S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)


RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
            SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2       THE SUB REGISTRAR
            ERAVIPURAM SRO, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691011


OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT. PREETHA K K (SR GP)




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P (C) No.17077/2023                     -2-

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this court being aggrieved by the fact that the

2nd respondent has not considered Ext.P4 representation for removal of adverse

entries regarding the properties comprised in Sy.No.245/8C in Re-Sy No.50 in

Block 130 of Mundakkal Village, Kollam District. Certain transactions in respect of

the property at the instance of the petitioner were subject matter of proceedings

before the Family Court at the instance of the petitioner's former wife. According to

the petitioner, all the issues between the petitioner and his former wife have been

settled. Reference in this regard is made to Ext.P5 produced along with I.A.

No.1/2023. The petitioner had transferred the property to his cousin to prevent any

claim by his former wife and this transaction was declared as a sham transaction by

the Family Court, Kollam through Ext.P1 order. It is submitted that despite the

settlement, the adverse entries in respect of the property have not been removed.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will

be satisfied if a direction is given to the 2 nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 within a

time frame.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and

considering the limited nature of the reliefs sought for by the petitioner, this writ

petition will stand disposed of directing that the 2 nd respondent to consider and

pass orders on Ext.P4, having due regard to the proceedings before the Family

Court, Kollam within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a certified

copy of this judgment.

Sd/- GOPINATH P.

JUDGE AMG

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17077/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FAMILY COURT KOLLAM IN OP (OTHERS) NO. 662/2018 DATED 07.02.2020

Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 28.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE, MUNDAKKAL

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE, MUNDAKKAL DATED 15.1.2021

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION DATED 06.01.2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ERAVIPURAM SRO