Rosemary Mathew vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 11526 Ker

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                       PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 17TH
                    KARTHIKA, 1945
                WP(C) NO. 36283 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:

        ROSEMARY MATHEW
        AGED 34 YEARS
        D/O T.M. MATHEW, RESIDING AT THUMBASSERI,
        KAKKANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682037
        BY ADVS.
        K.V.KRISHNAKUMAR
        NAVOD PRASANNAN PATTALI
RESPONDENTS:
   1   STATE OF KERALA,
       REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
       REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
   2   DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
       COLLECTORATE ROAD, THAVAKKARA, KANNUR P.O.,
       KERALA, PIN - 670002
   3   TALUK LAND BOARD,
       REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN & DEPUTY
       COLLECTOR (LA), KANNUR, PIN - 670002
   4   SUB REGISTRAR
       SH36, PARANKI BAZAR, VELAPURAM, TALIPARAMBA,
       KERALA, PIN - 670141

        BY SRG.P. SRI. DEEPA NARAYANAN.
    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 08.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.36283/2023
                                  2




                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that he is the owner in

possession of an extent of 1 hectare 17 ares and 31

sq.mtrs., of land comprised in old survey No.31 of

Kurumathoor Desom, Kurumathoor Village,

Talipramba Taluk obtained as per Ext.P1 Jenmom

Deed. He intends to sell the aforesaid property.

However, the petitioner apprehends that, the 4 th

respondent, the Sub Registrar will not effect

registration on the basis of Ext.P3 order passed by

the 3rd respondent and Ext.P4 issued by the 2 nd

respondent prohibiting registration of the properties

in survey No.31/1 of Kurumathoor Village.

Accordingly, the petitioner has approached this

Court for a declaration that the petitioner is entitled

to transfer the property covered by Ext.P1 and to W.P.(C) No.36283/2023

register the conveyance deed.

2. Ext.P4 is a general prohibitory order

issued by the District Collector whereby registration

regarding the properties which were owned by one

Cherian Joseph, Kattakkayam and comprised in

certain survey numbers of Kurumathoor Village is

prohibited.

3. This Court has held that there cannot be

any such general prohibition to register documents

and the right of the State to initiate action to protect

the interests of the State is always available, even if

a registration is effected.

4. This Court has in Selvam and Others

V. State of Kerala and Others (2010(1) KHC

581) has held that the revenue officials cannot

direct the registering authority to register

documents only on production of NOC from the

Revenue Officials and that no power is conferred on

the revenue officials to interfere in the registration W.P.(C) No.36283/2023

process when a document is presented for

registration.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner

refers to the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C)

No.41167 of 2022, wherein this Court held as

follows:

"2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 4th respondent to register the lease agreement executed between the petitioner and the Manager, Kerala Gramin Bank and to direct respondents 4 to 6 to consider registration and mutation of 40.43 Ares of land owned by the petitioner as per sale deed No.2665/1994 of SRO, Taliparamba in Re-Sy.No.103/7 (old Sy.No.31/1) of Kurumathur Village, by exempting the ban imposed as per Exts.P3 and P4. The reason for refusal is Ext.P4 order dated 29.07.2021 issued by the 2nd respondent whereby owing to a ceiling case with respect to the properties which were owned by one Cheriyan Joseph of Kattakkayam, registration regarding properties comprised in certain survey numbers of Kurumathur Village were prohibited. This Court had held that there cannot be any such prohibition to register documents and the right W.P.(C) No.36283/2023

of the State to initiate action is always available, even if a registration is effected. I do not find any reason to take a different view."

In the light of the aforesaid decision, I do not

find any reason to take a different view in this writ

petition. Accordingly, it is declared that Exts.P3 and

P4 shall not stand in the way of registration of the

property of the petitioner covered by Ext.P1.

However, it is made clear that, the right of the

Government to initiate steps or to continue steps

under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, shall not, in any

way be affected by this judgment.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-

W.P.(C) No.36283/2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36283/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JENMOM DEED NO.5096/2008 DATED 20.11.2018 OF TALIPARAMBA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 27.06.2023 OF KURUMATHOOR VILLAGE, TALIPARAMBA TALUK Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 05.11.1993 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 11.07.2001 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 23425 OF 2008 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 26.07.2016 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 24553 OF 2016 OF HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA