Harris,Represented By Power Of ... vs Tahsildar
2023 Latest Caselaw 9830 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 22ND BHADRA,
                                 1945
                      WP(C) NO.20427 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

            HARRIS, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMMED,
            THACHARATHODIYIL HOUSE, PEREUMANNUR P.O.,
            PERUMANNUR AMSAM DESOM, CHALISSERY VILLAGE,
            PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD - 679576,
            REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
            SRI.SIDDIQUE T.P., THOZHUMPURATH PALLIYALIL
            KUMARANELLUR, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD,
            PIN - 679552


            BY ADVS.
            ROY CHACKO
            P.L.JOHN


RESPONDENTS:

    1       TAHSILDAR,
            TALUK OFFICE, OTTAPALAM, PIN - 679101


    2       THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS)
            PATTAMBI, MINI CIVIL STATION, KANNIYAMPURAM P.O.,
            OTTAPALAM, PIN - 679104


            BY SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP



     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   13.09.2023,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.20427 OF 2023                2




                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner's predecessor-in-interest was

issued with Ext.P5 certificate pursuant to S.M

proceedings No.3260 of 1976 dated 26.09.1978 of

the Land Tribunal, Thrithala. There was mistake in

the survey number noted in Ext.P5 and accordingly

the petitioner submitted Ext.P6 application

requesting for assignment of jenmam right in

favour of the petitioner and for correction of

mistake in the survey number noted in Ext.P5.

Pursuant to Ext.P6, Ext.P7 reply was issued to the

petitioner by the 2nd respondent asking the

petitioner to correct the S.M number quoted in the

prior documents or else, the request in Ext.P6

cannot be entertained. The learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the description of the

property in the purchase certificate was also

sought to be corrected in Ext.P6 and without

reference to the request made in Ext.P6

application, Ext.P7 communication was issued by

the 2nd respondent. Accordingly, the petitioner has

filed this writ petition for directing the

2nd respondent to issue purchase certificate in

favour of the petitioner in conformity with the

description of property shown in Ext.P2 sale deed

on the basis of Ext.P6 application.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the

petitioner as well as the learned Government

Pleader appearing for the respondents.

3. The reasons stated by the 2nd respondent in

Ext.P6 does not conform to the request of the

petitioner in Ext.P6. Ext.P7 seems to have been

issued without proper application of mind.

Accordingly, Ext.P7 is set aside. There will be a

direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P6

and to pass appropriate orders thereon, after

affording an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner. This shall be done within a period of

one month from the date of receipt of a certified

copy of this judgment. The petitioner will also be

free to produce any additional documents and the

same shall be considered by the 2nd respondent

while considering Ext.P6.

With the above direction, this writ petition

is disposed of.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE sp/13/09/2023

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE GENERAL POWER OF ATTORNEY DATED 19.11.2022 EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1627/2022 DATED 02.11.2022 EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE TAX NO.KL09061013728/2022 DATED 29.11.2022 ISSUED BY THE KAPPUR VILLAGE OFFICE.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.419/1987 DATED 02.05.1987 OF S.R.O. KUMARANELLOOR, EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE DATED 26.09.1978.

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED NIL. EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 29.05.2023