Shobhana vs The Sub Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 11580 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. 36913 OF 2023
PETITIONER/S:

          SHOBHANA
          AGED 38 YEARS
          D/O. GUNASEKAR, 256B, GANDHINAGAR COLONY,
          SAHAYAGIRI MARAYOOR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, KERALA.,
          PIN - 685620
          BY ADVS.
          M.R.DHANIL
          SENITTA P. JOJO


RESPONDENTS:

   1      THE SUB COLLECTOR
          REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI
          DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 685613
   2      THE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICER
          OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI
          DISTRICT, KERALA., PIN - 685613

          BY SR. G.P. SMT. 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.36913/2023
                            2




                        JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that she is the absolute

owner in possession of an extent of 1.21 Ares

(2.98 cents) of land comprised in Re.Sy. No. 274/4-

1-1-13 of Marayoor village obtained as per Ext.P1

sale deed. The petitioner also states that he has

been paying the land tax for the said property.

When the petitioner made steps for sale of the said

property, he came to know that the first respondent

has issued Ext.P3 communication to the effect that

he must obtain prior permission/NOC from the 1 st

respondent Sub Collector, for the sale of his land

situated in Marayoor village. The petitioner submits

that this Court in Exts.P4 and P5 judgments has

issued directions to the registering authority to

register conveyance deed, not withstanding the

orders contained in Ext.P3. The petitioner therefore W.P.(C) No.36913/2023

prays for a direction to quash Ext.P3 and to direct

the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed as and

when presented, without insisting for permission

from the 1st respondent.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. A Division Bench of this Court in Selvam

v. State of Kerala and Others [(2010 (1) KHC

581) : (2010 (1) KLT 508)] has held that the

revenue authorities cannot interfere with the

registration process when a document is presented

for registration and the registration of the document

has to be carried out under the provisions of the

Registration Act. It was also held that the revenue

authorities cannot direct the registering authority to

register documents only on production of NOC

from the revenue officials.

In the light of the said decision and Exts.P4 and

P5 judgments, there will be a direction to the 2 nd W.P.(C) No.36913/2023

respondent to register the sale deed without

insisting for permission/NOC from the 1st

respondent, as and when the petitioner presents the

deed for registration, if the same is otherwise in

order.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-

W.P.(C) No.36913/2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 36913/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.

1860/1/2016 DATED 07/11/2016 OF DEVIKULAM SRO Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT .NO. KL06010903010/2023 DATED 13/07/2023 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER/COMMUNICATION BY 1ST RESPONDENT, DATED 02-08-2019 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C) NO.16307/2022, DATED 13/06/2022 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 6601/2021, DATED 13/09/2021 OF THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA