Muralidharan vs Tahsildar (Survey)
2024 Latest Caselaw 31987 Ker

Kerala High Court

Muralidharan vs Tahsildar (Survey) on 7 November, 2024

Author: Kauser Edappagath

Bench: Kauser Edappagath

W.P.(C) No. 39347/2024

                                   ..1..

                                                          2024:KER:83049

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                 PRESENT

           THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

  THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 16TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                         WP(C) NO. 39347 OF 2024

PETITIONER:

           MURALIDHARAN
           AGED 69 YEARS, S/O CHENNI,
           RESIDING AT KAPPAKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
           THIRUVANKULAM, IRUMPANAM P.O.,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682309

           BY ADVS.
           G.HARIHARAN
           PRAVEEN.H.
           K.S.SMITHA
           V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
           B.R.SINDU
           AFNA V.P.
           V.ROHITH
           REMYA MURALI
RESPONDENTS:

     1     TAHSILDAR (SURVEY)
           KANNAYANUR TALUK OFFICE,
           ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
     2     THE VILLAGE OFFICER
           THIRUVANKULAMVILLAGE, THIRUVANKULAM,
           ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682305
     3     TALUK SURVEYOR
           KANNAYANUR TALUK,
           ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
           VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
07.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No. 39347/2024

                                 ..2..

                                                          2024:KER:83049


                         JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 14

cents of land comprised in Survey No.4/16 of Irumpanam Village,

Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam District. The petitioner preferred

Ext.P4 Form-8 application under the Kerala Survey and

Boundaries Act before the respondent No.1 to survey and fix the

boundaries of his property. The grievance of the petitioner is that

the respondent No.1 is not acting upon Ext.P4 application.

Having heard Sri.G.Hariharan, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and Smt.Vidya Kuriakose, the

learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is disposed of with

a direction to the respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of

Ext.P4 application, if it is received and not disposed of so far, in

accordance with law, after hearing the petitioner within a period

of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE APA

..3..

2024:KER:83049

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39347/2024

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.65/92 OF SRO THRIPUNITHURA ON 06.01.1992

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.03.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LATEST BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 24.04.2024 ISSUED BY THE 2NDRESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 02.09.2024 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.8