Kerala High Court
Raybow Builders And Developers Pvt. ... vs Special Tahasildar(La) General on 20 June, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 3132 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
RAYBOW BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR,
ABDUL RAHIM MOOSAKUTTY.
ROOM NO. 2/521,2/541-A, FATHIMA COMPLEX,
NEAR PAVARATTY BUS STAND, PAVARATTY,
THRISSUR, KERALA, INDIA, PIN - 680507
BY ADVS.
DIVYA C BALAN
P.D.SUBRAMANIAN NAMPOOTHIRI
K.N.SUGATHAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 SPECIAL TAHASILDAR(LA) GENERAL
COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682030
2 VILLAGE OFFICER
CHERANALLOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, SOUTH
CHITTOOR,KANAYANNOORTALUK, ERNAKULAMDISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 682027
3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
KERALA, PIN - 682030
OTHER PRESENT:
GP-DEEPA V
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
20.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) No.3132 of 2024 2
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
.................................................................
W.P.(C) No.3132 of 2024
.................................................................
Dated this the 20th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P7 award to the
extent it ordered to transfer the award amount to the Principal Sub Court,
Ernakulam and for a consequential direction to the 1 st respondent to
transfer the award amount as per Ext.P7 to the petitioner company.
2. It is averred that the petitioner is a company limited by shares as
evident from Ext.P1 certificate of incorporation. The petitioner company
was initially a limited liability partnership firm as evident from Ext.P2. Later
on the said partnership firm was converted to a company as provided
under Section 366 of the Companies Act, 2013 as evident from Ext.P3
certificate of incorporation and thereafter the name of the company was
changed as 'Raybow Builders and Developers Pvt. Ltd. as per Ext.P1.
The petitioner after incorporation of the said company sought for mutation
of the properties. This Court by Ext.P4 judgment directed consideration of
the application for mutation submitted by the petitioner. Petitioner relies on
the judgment in Park Residency (M/s), EKM v. State of Kerala and
Others, 2013(1) KHC 767 in support of the contention that the petitioner
is entitled for the transfer of registry in their name. While so as part of
acquisition proceedings for construction of Perandoor-Vaduthala Bridge, a
certain extent of property of the petitioner was acquired and Ext.P7 award
was passed. The land acquisition authority while passing Ext.P7 decided
to transfer the award amount to the Court of Principal Sub Judge,
Ernakulam. The petitioner submits that the said part of the award whereby
the amount has been deposited before the court is absolutely incorrect. It
is the contention of the petitioner that even without any document
regarding the transfer of said property of the partnership firm to the
company the 1st respondent is bound to pay the award amount to the
petitioner company. The original title deeds of the property which are in
the possession of the company were also transferred to the land
acquisition authority. Moreover Ext.P10 affidavit has been submitted by
the erstwhile partners of the firm intimating that they have no objection in
transferring the award amount in the name of the company. It is in the said
circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court challenging
Ext.P7 award to the extent it directed deposit of the award amount before
the Principal Sub Court, Ernakulam.
3. A statement has been filed by the 1 st respondent wherein it is stated
that in the enquiry it was found that the land was registered in the name of
M/s.E.P.Builders and Developers LLP by document no.1740 of 2017 dated
06.05.2017 of SRO, Ernakulam and that the petitioner has failed to
produce any document evidencing change of title or assignment of
acquired land in favour of the petitioner. In spite of notice being issued to
produce the original documents evidencing title, no document was
produced by the petitioner. It is in the said circumstances that the amount
has been transferred to the Principal Sub Court, Ernakulam, which is the
correct procedure to be followed as per the provisions of the Right to Fair
Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
Resettlement Act, 2013 since the petitioner has failed to produce any
document evidencing title over the said property.
4. I have heard the rival contentions of both sides.
5. Though the petitioner has submitted an application for transfer of
registry of the property which was in the name of the earlier partnership
firm and a direction has been issued by this Court as per Ext.P4, no
document has been produced to show that the property has been mutated
in the name of the petitioner. Since the title deed of the property was in the
name of the partnership firm, while passing Ext.P7 award the amount was
directed to be deposited before the Principal Sub Court, Ernakulam for
adjudication. From the statement filed by the 1 st respondent it is clear that
no documents have been produced by the petitioner to substantiate that
they have title over the acquired property.
After considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, I
am of the view that the procedure followed by the land acquisition
authority in depositing the award amount before the Principal Sub Court,
Ernakulam is only in accordance with law. The petitioner has to approach
the competent court and seek for disbursal of the amount after
establishing their right over the property and their entitlement for receiving
the compensation amount. The petitioner could adjudicate all their claims
before the competent court and the court shall adjudicate the claim
without much delay. Leaving open such liberty of the petitioner the writ
petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
cks
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3132/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
INCORPORATION DATED 28/09/2021 OF
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, ROC- ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 16, CERTIFICATE
OF INCORPORATION DATED 10/04/2017 OF
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, ROC- ERNAKULAM
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF
INCORPORATION DATED 28/04/2021 OF
REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES, CENTRAL
REGISTRATION CENTRE
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W P (C)
NO. 43124 OF 2023 DATED 21/12/2023
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.
16454 OF 2022 DATED 17/08/2022
Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT REPORTED IN
2013(1) KHC 767
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD NO. 02/2024
DATED NILL
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED
02/11/2023
Exhibit P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1740 OF
2017 DATED 06/05/2017
Exhibit P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 23-1-
