Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Radhakrishnan vs the State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan vs The State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 20, 2023
~5 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1375128

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/19379/2018

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Radhakrishnan

Respondent

The State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....not been yet issued by the government in their favour. hesubmitted that, therefore, as soon as the government issues..4.. ‘pattayams’ as per law, necessary steps for execution of the sale deeds will also be proceeded with. he submitted that, in fact, the government has issued an order, bearing no.go(ms)no.18/2014/td dated 03.02.2014, authorising the collectors of the respective reveneue districts, as competent officers, to issue no objection certificates for registration of documents involving transfer of property, including contract of sale for immovable property belonging to or vested in it or public sector undertakings, but that no such has been yet issued thereafter.3. sri.riyal devassy - learned government pleader,submitted that he has no instructions as to the milestones of the issuance of ‘pattayams’ with respect to the lands in question; but that if this court is so inclined, the competent authority of the 1st respondent is willing to consider the same and issue appropriate orders without any delay. he added that, in fact, he also does not have instructions whether the sidco has approached the government for issuance of ‘pattayams’, but that if they are to do so now, government is willing to consider it without any avoidable delay. in the afore circumstances, i allow this writ petition, directing the 2nd respondent or such other competent authority ..5.. of the sidco, to approach the government appropriately through a representation or such other proceedings, for issuance of ‘pattayams’ with respect to the properties in question, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. once this is done, government will hear the sidco, as also the petitioners and take a decision on the same without any delay, but not later than three months thereafter. needless to say, while the afore exercise is completed, the government will specifically keep in mind ext.p12 order, as also any other germane order or document, as.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 30TH JYAISHTA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 19379 OF 2018 PETITIONERS:

1 RADHAKRISHNAN AGED 62 YEARS S/O RAMAN NAIR, AISWARYA, KANHIKKULAM PO, PALAKKAD DIST. 2 MANIKANDAN T.S S/O PADMANABHAN NAIR, SREEDEVI NIVAS, MUNDUR PO, PALAKKAD DIST. 3 UNNIKRISHNAN MENON S/O MADHUSOODHANA NAIR, PALEEKKARA, PUDUPATHIYARAM PO,PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4 GOPALAKRISHNAN S/O MUTHUMANNADIAR, JYOTHI NIVAS, PUDUPATHIYARAM PO, PALAKKAD DIST. 5 THOMAS SEBASTIAN S/O OUSEPH DEVASSIA, SANTHOSH NIVAS,INDUSTRIAL ESTATE PO, PALAKKAD DIST. 6 MOHANDAS T S/O MADHAVAN NAIR, THEKKEETTIL HOUSE,CHUNDAMBATTA PO, PALAKKAD DIST. 7 THOMAS P.C S/O FENN CHERIYAN, HOUSE NO.3/634, RABEENDRA NAGAR,C.N PURAM, PALAKKAD DIST.5. 8 SUNILKUMAR S/O GANGADHARAN, KAKKANATTU HOUSE,CHAZHOOR PO, THRISSUR DIST. 9 PRABHA MATHEW D/O THOMAS K, 197, SOORYA NAGAR,TILLERY, KOLLAM DIST. 10 SUDHEESH P.V S/O SUBASH U.V, SITHARA, KUNNAKKAVU PO,PERINTHALMANNA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. ..2..

BY ADV SRI.P.VINODKUMAR RESPONDENTS:

1 THE STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3 THE ESTATE MANAGER INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, OLAVAKODE, PALAKKAD-PIN- 679331. BY ADVS. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, SC, SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

SRI RIYAL DEVASSY-GPSRI G BIJU-SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..3..

JUDGMENT

The petitioners say that they have been allotted lands by the Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (SIDCO), under an outright purchase scheme; and that they have remitted the entire sale consideration against it, within the stipulated time. They say that, however, in spite of this and notwithstanding the fact that more than five years have now elapsed, no action has been taken by the SIDCO to execute sale deeds with respect to their allotted lands in their favour and thus pray that they be directed to do so, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The afore request of the petitioners, as made by

their learned counsel - Sri.P.Vinod Kumar, was answered by Sri.G.Biju - learned Standing Counsel for the SIDCO, saying that his client has absolutely no objection in executing the sale deeds in favour of the petitioners with respect to the lands allotted to them; but that they are incapacitated from doing so because, the ‘Pattayams’ with respect to the lands had not been yet issued by the Government in their favour. He

submitted that, therefore, as soon as the Government issues

..4.. ‘Pattayams’ as per law, necessary steps for execution of the sale deeds will also be proceeded with. He submitted that, in fact, the Government has issued an order, bearing No.GO(MS)No.18/2014/TD dated 03.02.2014, authorising the Collectors of the respective reveneue districts, as competent officers, to issue No Objection Certificates for registration of documents involving transfer of property, including contract of sale for immovable property belonging to or vested in it or public sector undertakings, but that no such has been yet issued thereafter.

3. Sri.Riyal Devassy - learned Government Pleader,

submitted that he has no instructions as to the milestones of the issuance of ‘Pattayams’ with respect to the lands in question; but that if this Court is so inclined, the competent Authority of the 1st respondent is willing to consider the same and issue appropriate orders without any delay. He added that, in fact, he also does not have instructions whether the SIDCO has approached the Government for issuance of ‘Pattayams’, but that if they are to do so now, Government is willing to consider it without any avoidable delay. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, directing the 2nd respondent or such other competent Authority ..5.. of the SIDCO, to approach the Government appropriately through a representation or such other proceedings, for issuance of ‘Pattayams’ with respect to the properties in question, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Once this is done, Government will hear the SIDCO, as also the petitioners and take a decision on the same without any delay, but not later than three months thereafter. Needless to say, while the afore exercise is completed, the Government will specifically keep in mind Ext.P12 order, as also any other germane order or document, as may be presented before it by the parties, and its opinion on it will be reflected in the resultant order. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE ACR ..6.. APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19379/2018 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/HAIKAI/10126/97 DATED 20.8.2010. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(5)OLA/2754/14 DATED 26.2.2014. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/07 DATED 23.09.2016. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)14000/93 DATED DATED 11.1.1994. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)14000/93 DATED 7.6.1994. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)/GENL/6147/2000 DATED 25.2.2006. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE/GENL/6147/2000 DATED 18.2.2006. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/000284/97 DATED 10.2.1997. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/000284 DATED 4.6.1997. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/14367/99 DATED 18.7.2011. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO.IE(4)OLA/15240/10 DATED 25.1.2011. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O (M.S) NO.14/2003/ID DATED 27.1.2003. EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED EXECUTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF K.J SCARIA. EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 7.9.2016. EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.16362/2016.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial