Kerala High Court
Nusaiba vs State Of Kerala on 11 April, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 24595 OF 2016
PETITIONER:
NUSAIBA
AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. MOIDEENKUNHI,RESIDING AT
IYVAD AMSOM, MANGAD DESOM, KOYILANDI TALUK,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
BY ADVS.
SRI.VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN
SMT.M.MANJU
SRI.R.SUDHISH
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2 INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
3 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
WAYANAD DISTRICT, WAYANAD-673576
4 THE SUB REGISTRAR
VYTHIRI, WAYANAD-673576
BY ADV.
SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.24595 of 2016
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 24595 of 2016
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024.
JUDGMENT
According to the petitioner, he is the
absolute owner in possession of 0.3900 hectors of
land in Re-Survey No.141/2 in Block No.25 of Vythiri
Village in Wayanad District. It is submitted that the
Civil court declared that the petitioner is the
absolute owner of the property as per Ext.P1
judgment. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1
judgment became final. Thereafter, the petitioner
approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.18148 of
2012 challenging the notice issued by the Village
Officer, Kunnathidavaka directing the 4th respondent
not to register the document presented by the
petitioner. Petitioner is the 14th petitioner in the
above writ petition. This Court allowed the writ
petition directing the 3rd respondent therein to
collect tax and issue possession certificate to the
petitioners therein. Ext.P3 in the said writ petition
was quashed by this Court. Ext.P2 is the judgment
in W.P.(C).No.18148 of 2012. Accordingly, the
petitioner presented the assignment deed for
registration and he purchased the stamp papers
also. But the 4th respondent did not register the
documents and returned the documents to the
petitioner with an objection stating that the land
sought to be registered is the Government property.
Ext.P3 is the order of the 4th respondent. According
to the petitioner, competent Civil court declared that
the petitioners are the absolute owners of the
property and the Government and its officers are
restrained from enjoying the property of the
petitioners. Hence this Writ petition is filed with
following prayers:
"i. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit
P3 dated 21.4.2016 of the 4th respondent Sub
Registrar, Vythiri.
ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 4 th
respondent to register the Assignment Document
executed by the petitioner and others dated
19.4.2016 on a non judicial stamp worth Rs.
1,14,000/- forthwith.
iii. Issue such other writ, order or direction
which this Honourable court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
3. When this Writ petition came up for
consideration on 26.07.2016, this Court passed the
following order:
"Admit. Issue notice to the respondents.
There will be an interim order directing the
fourth respondent to register the document, if any,
presented by the petitioner in respect of the
property covered by Ext.P1 judgment, if the
petitioner has remitted stamp duty on the value
shown in the document."
4. The State challenged the above interim
order by filing Writ Appeal No.2048/2016. The
above Writ Appeal was allowed in the light of the
fact that R.S.A. No.1084/2016 was allowed by this
Court by setting aside the order dismissing the
delay petition to file an appeal. It will be better to
extract the judgment dated 30.05.2018 in
W.A.No.2048/2016:
The State is in appeal against an interim
order dated 26.7.2016 in W.P.(C) No. 24595 of
2016. As per the impugned order, the following
direction has been issued:
"There will be an interim order directing
the fourth respondent to register the
document, if any, presented by the
petitioner in respect of the property
covered by Ext.P1 judgment, if the
petitioner has remitted stamp duty on the
value shown in the document."
2. This appeal was admitted on
20.10.2016 and an interim order of stay was
granted by this Court. Therefore, the order
appealed against has not been complied with.
3. The learned Government Pleader has
handed over to us copy of the judgment dated
5.7.2017 of a learned Single Judge of this Court,
allowing R.S.A. No. 1084 of 2016 filed by the
State against Ext.P1 judgment referred to in the
order appealed against. As per the said judgment,
this Court has condoned a delay of two years and
nine days in filing the first appeal against Ext.P1
judgment. The Second Appeal has been allowed
and the lower appellate court has been directed to
consider and dispose of the first appeal filed by
the State against Ext.P1 judgment within a period
of six months of the date of receipt of a copy of
the said judgment.
4. What emerges from the above is that
Ext.P1 judgment has not become final but that,
the same is the subject matter of an appeal
pending before the Subordinate Judge's Court,
Sulthan Bathery. The order appealed against, has
obviously been passed on the assumption that
Ext.P1 judgment had become final.
5. In view of the subsequent event noted
above, this appeal is allowed, the interim order
dated 26.7.2016 is vacated. The writ petition
would have to be considered taking into account
the above noted subsequent development also
and disposed of on the merits. Copy of the
judgment dated 5 th July, 2017 in R.S.A. No. 1084
of 2016 shall be retained as part of the records of
this appeal."
In the light of the above judgment, I think the
prayers in this Writ petition are infructuous. After
disposal of the appeal suit filed against Ext.P1
judgment, the petitioner can proceed in accordance
with law.
With the above observation, this Writ petition is
disposed of.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24595/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPYOF THE JUDGMENT IN OS. NO.
256 OF 2004 ON THE FILE OF THE
MUNISFF'S COURT, KALPATTA DATED
29.9.2007
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPYOF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS
HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC.NO.18148 OF
2012 DATED 19.8.2014
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPYOF THE ORDER OF THE 4TH
RESPONDENT DATED 21.4.2016 REFUSING
TO REGISTER THE DOCUMENT
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
