Kerala High Court
Mariyamma vs Addl. Tahsildar (Land Records) on 11 March, 2022
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 20TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020
PETITIONERS:
1 MARIYAMMA, AGED 76 YEARS, W/O LATE JACOB, MOONJELY
HOUSE, MANAKODAM KARA, CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE,
CHENDAMANGALAM P.O., PIN-683 512, PARAVUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
2 POULOSE, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O JACOB, MOONJELY HOUSE,
MANAKODAM KARA, CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHENDAMANGALAM
P.O., PIN-683 512, PARAVUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
BY ADV M.G.JEEVAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 ADDL. TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS), NORTH PARAVUR, TALUK
OFFICE, NORTH PARAVUR, PIN-683 513, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
2 TALUK SURVEYOR, NORTH PARAVUR, TALUK OFFICE,
NORTH PARAVUR, PIN-683 513. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
3 SECRETARY, CHENDAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, GRAMA
PANCHAYATH OFFICE, CHENDAMANGALAM, PIN-683 512,
N.PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM
SRI.K.SUJAI SATHIAN
SMT.ASHA MARIAM MATHEWS
SMT. MARRY LIA SABU,SC
SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR.G.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition was originally filed by the petitioners on the allegation that, even though they are the full owners and in possession of the property in question, action was taken against them by the third respondent - Secretary of the Grama Panchayat alleging that they have filled up a public "Thodu". They assert that their title documents will unequivocally establish that no one has any right over the property covered by it, but that on account of certain errors in the Resurvey conducted by the competent Authorities, an unnecessary controversy has arisen.
2. The petitioners say that, therefore, they have preferred Ext.P8 objections before the Resurvey Authority and Ext.P11 representation before the first respondent, seeking that their property be measured on the basis of their title deeds, so as to rectify the errors in the Survey Records; along with further representations, namely Exts.P10 and P13, preferred before the third respondent - Panchayat, not to take any action pending orders from the first respondent.
3. The petitioners thus pray that the first respondent be WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020 3 directed to rectify the Resurvey Records and that the third respondent be directed to await such orders before any further action is taken based, on the impugned notices issued to them.
4. I have heard Sri.M.G.Jeevan - learned counsel for the petitioners; Smt.Mary Lia Sabu, representing the learned standing counsel for the third respondent and Smt.K.Amminikutty, learned Senior Government Pleader.
5. Sri.M.G.Jeevan - learned counsel for the petitioners, submitted that, pending this lis, the first petitioner died but that the cause of action and the right to sue survives in favour of the second petitioner. He added that, in any event, if this Court is inclined to direct the other legal heirs also to appear before the Tahsildar for appropriate action, it can also be done.
6. The learned Senior Government Pleader - Smt.K.Amminikutty, in response, submitted that action to rectify the Resurvey Records have already been taken and final orders will be issued by the first respondent - Additional Tahsildar after hearing all sides. She prayed that, therefore, this writ petition be closed on such terms.
7. Smt.Mary Lia Sabu, learned counsel for the third respondent, submitted that her client had acted as per law, WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020 4 based on the Resurvey Records and added that if the same is to be rectified, then they will await necessary orders thereon from the first respondent, before pursuing further action.
8. The conspectus of the above submissions made on behalf the parties by their learned counsel would clearly show that the controversy has arisen on account of certain alleged errors in the Resurvey Records. Since the learned Senior Government Pleader says that these errors have now been taken up for rectification and that final orders will be issued without delay, I am certain that this Court will be justified in disposing of this writ petition with the following directions:
(a) The second petitioner and the other legal heirs of the deceased first petitioner will mark appearance before the first respondent - Tahsildar at 11 a.m. on 30.03.2022, on which day, the said Authority will either hear them or fix another convenient date for such purpose and complete proceedings for rectification of Resurvey Records as prayed for by the second petitioner. While completing such exercise, I leave liberty to the first respondent - Tahsildar to hear the third respondent -
Secretary of the Panchayat also, if it is found so warranted.
(b) The afore exercise shall be completed by the first WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020 5 respondent - Tahsildar, thus culminating in an appropriate order to be communicated to the parties, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(c) On the Tahsildar issuing orders as afore, the third respondent will consider the same and then take a decision, after hearing the second petitioner and the legal heirs of the deceased first petitioner, whether any further action pursuant to their notices are required.
(d) It goes without saying that until such time as the first respondent completes the exercise ordered in direction (a) above and communicates the orders to the parties, all further action by the third respondent shall stand deferred and will be taken forward only in terms of such decision.
(e) Needless to say, all contentions of the rival parties are left open to be pursued by them at any of the afore stages, as they may be advised.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020 6 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23495/2020 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF PURCHASE CERTIFICATE NO 276 DATED 7.3.1970 ISSUED BY TAHASILDAR, NORTH PARAVUR EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE REGD SALE DEED NO 1674/91 DATED 18.11.1991 OF CHENDAMANGALAM SRO EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF TAX RECEIPT NO 4022011 DATED 26.11.2009 ISSUED BY CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF TAX RECEIPT NO 4714578 DATED 30.8.2010 ISSUED BY CHAENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF REGD SETTLEMENT NO 1482 DATED 2.9.2010 OF CHENDAMANGALAM SRO EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF TAX RECEIPT NO 5552655 DATED 2.2.2017 ISSUED BY CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.7.2020 ISSUED BY CHENDAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY PETITIONER DATED 23.7.2012 BEFORE RESURVEY AUTHORITY EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF NOTICE DATED 17.8.2020 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO PETITIONERS EXHIBIT P10 REPRESENTATION BY PETITIONERS DATED 25.8.2020 BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONERS DATED 14.9.2020 BEFORE 1ST RESPONDENT WP(C) NO. 23495 OF 2020 7 EXHIBIT P12 COPY OF VILLAGE OFFICERS REPORT DATED 8.10.2020 EXHIBIT P13 COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF PETITIONERS DATED 12.10.2020 BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT PANCHAYATH EXHIBIT P14 COPY OF RESURVEY PLAN PERTAINING TO PETITIONERS PROPERTY