A.Jaya Vs. State of Kerala - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1013366
CourtKerala High Court
Decided OnJan-29-2013
JudgeHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
AppellantA.Jaya
RespondentState of Kerala
Excerpt:
in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice p.r.ramachandra menon tuesday, the 29th day of january 2013 9th magha 193 wp(c).no. 1777 of 2013 (v) -------------------------- petitioner(s) : --------------------- a.jaya, aged 4 years, w/o. arogyaswamy, residing at house no. ix/1898a colony road, ikka nagar, munnar.p.o. pin-685612. by adv. sri.n.m.varghese respondent(s) : ---------------------- 1. state of kerala represented by the secretary, revenue department secretariat, thiruvananthapuram ”001. 2. the inspector general of registration, thiruvananthapuram ”001. 3. the district registrar idukki, civil station, kuyilimala idukki district ”602. 4. the district collector, idukki, civil station, kuyilimala idukki district ”602. 5. the tahsildar devikulam taluk, devikulam.p.o. idukki district-685613.6. the sub registrar devikulam, devkikulam.p.o., pin-685613. r by government pleader sri. s. jamal this writ petition (civil) having come up for admission on 29-01-2013, the court on the same day delivered the following: bp wp(c).no. 1777 of 2013 (v) appendix petitioner(s) exhibits : ext.p1: a photocopy of patta in l.a. no. 99/99 dated 20 8-1999 issued in the name of the petitioner. ext.p2: a photocopy of agreement to sell dated 24 11-2010 executed by the petitioner. ext.p3: a photocopy of residential ownership certificate no. b36849/12 dated 18 12-12 issued in the name of the buyer. ext.p4: a photocopy of letter no. 17262/d3/05/rd dated 10 11-2006 issued by the 1st respondent addressing the 2nd respondent. ext.p5: a photocopy of communication no. r.r.3/2477/2006 dated 7 12-2006 issued by the 2nd respondent to the district registrar, idukki. ext.p6: a photocopy of communication no. r.r.3/5715/2006 dated 19 3-2007 issued by the 2nd respondent to the 3rd respondent. ext.p7: a photocopy of judgment of this hon'ble court dated 14 11-12 in wpc no. 26853 of 2012.respondent's exhibits : nil. //true copy// p.a. to judge bp p.r. ramachandra menon, j.--------------------------------------- w.p.(c). no.1777 of 2013 ---------------------------------------- dated this the 29th day of january, 2013 judgment the petitioner has approached this court with the following prayers: "i) call for the entire records from the respondents related to the issue raised in the writ petition and pertaining to the exhibits produced; ii) call for the original of ext.p6 order impugned from the 2nd respondent and issue a writ of certiorari to quash the same; iii) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 6 to permit the petitioner causing presentation of duly prepared sale deed for registration before the 6th respondent, in continuation of ext.p2 agreement, in accordance with law, untrammeled by ext.p6 order impugned;" 2. the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to convey the property covered by ext.p1 'patta' w.p.c. no. 1777 of 2013 -2- and has executed ext.p2 agreement for sale in this regard. the grievance is that, the conveyance sought to be effected is not being permitted by the 6th respondent, who' according to the petitioner, insists the production of 'noc' from the revenue authority so as to register the deed of conveyance. the learned counsel submits that, there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for making such stipulation as the same is totally alien to the relevant provisions registration act/rules. the learned counsel also places reliance on the decision rendered by this court in selvam v. state of kerala (2010 (1) klt 508).3. heard the learned government pleader as well, who submits that there is absolutely no merit or bonafides in the writ petition, in so far as the petitioner has not approached the 6th respondent for causing to register the document. the idea and understanding of the petitioner as to the probable course that might be pursued by the 6th respondent is devoid of any merit or basis. it is also stated that, if the deed of conveyance pursuant to ext.p2, is presented before the 6th respondent, satisfying all the statutory requirements in accordance with the relevant w.p.c. no. 1777 of 2013 -3- provisions of the registration act/rules, paying the requisite fees, registration of the same will be caused to be effected as and when the document is presented. the submission as above is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of. the petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 6th respondent for further steps. p.r. ramachandra menon, judge. kp/-
Judgment:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 9TH MAGHA 193 WP(C).No. 1777 of 2013 (V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S) : --------------------- A.JAYA, AGED 4 YEARS, W/O. AROGYASWAMY, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO. IX/1898A COLONY ROAD, IKKA NAGAR, MUNNAR.P.O. PIN-685612. BY ADV. SRI.N.M.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S) : ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ”

001.

2. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ”

001.

3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, KUYILIMALA IDUKKI DISTRICT ”

602.

4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI, CIVIL STATION, KUYILIMALA IDUKKI DISTRICT ”

602. 5. THE TAHSILDAR DEVIKULAM TALUK, DEVIKULAM.P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT-685613.

6. THE SUB REGISTRAR DEVIKULAM, DEVKIKULAM.P.O., PIN-685613. R BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. JAMAL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BP WP(C).No. 1777 of 2013 (V) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : EXT.P1: A PHOTOCOPY OF PATTA IN L.A. NO. 99/99 DATED 20 8-1999 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: A PHOTOCOPY OF AGREEMENT TO SELL DATED 24 11-2010 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: A PHOTOCOPY OF RESIDENTIAL OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE NO. B36849/12 DATED 18 12-12 ISSUED IN THE NAME OF THE BUYER. EXT.P4: A PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER NO. 17262/D3/05/RD DATED 10 11-2006 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ADDRESSING THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: A PHOTOCOPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. R.R.3/2477/2006 DATED 7 12-2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, IDUKKI. EXT.P6: A PHOTOCOPY OF COMMUNICATION NO. R.R.3/5715/2006 DATED 19 3-2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: A PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 14 11-12 IN WPC NO. 26853 OF 2012.RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(C). No.1777 of 2013 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of January, 2013 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers: "i) Call for the entire records from the respondents related to the issue raised in the writ petition and pertaining to the exhibits produced; ii) Call for the original of Ext.P6 order impugned from the 2nd respondent and issue a writ of certiorari to quash the same; iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 6 to permit the petitioner causing presentation of duly prepared sale deed for registration before the 6th respondent, in continuation of Ext.P2 agreement, in accordance with law, untrammeled by Ext.P6 order impugned;" 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner wants to convey the property covered by Ext.P1 'patta' W.P.C. No. 1777 of 2013 -2- and has executed Ext.P2 agreement for sale in this regard. The grievance is that, the conveyance sought to be effected is not being permitted by the 6th respondent, who' according to the petitioner, insists the production of 'NOC' from the Revenue authority so as to register the deed of conveyance. The learned counsel submits that, there is absolutely no rhyme or reason for making such stipulation as the same is totally alien to the relevant provisions Registration Act/Rules. The learned counsel also places reliance on the decision rendered by this Court in Selvam v. State of Kerala (2010 (1) KLT 508).

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits that there is absolutely no merit or bonafides in the writ petition, in so far as the petitioner has not approached the 6th respondent for causing to register the document. The idea and understanding of the petitioner as to the probable course that might be pursued by the 6th respondent is devoid of any merit or basis. It is also stated that, if the deed of conveyance pursuant to Ext.P2, is presented before the 6th respondent, satisfying all the statutory requirements in accordance with the relevant W.P.C. No. 1777 of 2013 -3- provisions of the Registration Act/Rules, paying the requisite fees, registration of the same will be caused to be effected as and when the document is presented. The submission as above is recorded and the writ petition is disposed of. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 6th respondent for further steps. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. Kp/-