Kerala High Court
Temple Advisory Committee vs The Special Tahsildar, Travancore ... on 13 March, 2025
Author: Anil K.Narendran
Bench: Anil K.Narendran
1
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 19619 OF 2015
PETITIONERS:
1 KSHETHROPADESHAKA SAMITHI
AGED 65 YEARS
KOOTTALA SREE BHAGAVATHI
TEMPLE,MOOKKANNOOR,REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,MR.
SREEDHARAN NAIR,S/O. SANKARAN NAIR,MADATHIL
HOUSE,MOOKKANNOOR P.O,ANKAMAALY. [CORRECTED]
[CORRECTED AS 'MR.SASIDHARAN NAIR' AS PER ORDER DATED
29/06/2018 IN IA.11617/2018].
2 M.K MADHU NAIR
AGED 61 YEARS
S/O. (LATE) KRISHNAN NAIR,AMBADY,MOOKKANNOOR
P.O,ANKAMALY
BY ADVS.
SRI.ADARSH KUMAR
SRI.BIJU VARGHESE ABRAHAM
SRI.DILEEP CHANDRAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
2 DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER
TRAVANCORE DEVSWOM BOARD,THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM
2
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
3 ASSISTANT DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM
4 DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM
5 TAHSILDAR
ALUVA TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
6 VILLAGE OFFICER
KOTHAKULANGARA VILLAGE,ALUVA TALUK,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
7 LAND SPECIAL OFFICER
TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM
8 MR. A.P RAMAN NAIR
S/O. PARAMESWARAN NAIR,AMBATTU VEEDU,MOOKKANNOOR
P.O,ANKAMAALY
9 ADDL.R9 A.K JANAKI AMMA
AGED 90 YEARS
AMBATTU VEEDU, NEAR RATION STOP, MOOKANNUR P.O-683577.
10 ADDL.R10 DR.HEMAKUMARI
AGED 55 YEARS
W/O SHAKTIDHARAN, AMBATTU VEEDU, NEAR RATION STOP,
MOOKANNUR P.O-683577.
11 ADDL.R11 GEETHA SOMAN
AGED 53 YEARS
W/O SOMASUNDARAM, CHANDRAN HOUSE, NEAR RATION STOP,
MOOKANNUR PO-683577.
12 ADDL.R12 DR.C SHEELA
AGED 48 YEARS
W/O LATE DILEEP, AMBATTU VEEDU, NEAR RATION STOP,
MOOKANNUR P.O-683577.
13 ADDL.R13 C MANIKANDAN
AGED 46 YEARS
NEAR KOOTALA TEMPLE, MOOKANNUR PO-683577. (ADDL.R9 TO
R13 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 01/11/2018 IN
IA.03/2018)
3
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
14 ADDL.R14.P.P.PONAMMA,W/O.LATE A.P.RAMAN NAIR,AMBATTU
HOUSE,MOOKKANNOOR P.O,683 577
15 ADDL.R15.MINI.R.NAIR
D/O.LATE A.P.RAMAN NAIR,AMBATTU HOUSE,MOOKKANNOOR
P.O,683 577
16 ADDL.R16.SMITHA.R.NAIR
D/O.LATE A.P.RAMAN NAIR, AMBATTU HOUSE, MOOKKANNOOR
P.O,683 577 (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 14 TO 16 IMPLEADED
AS PER ORDER DATED 5.7.22 IN IA No.1 of 2021 in
WP(C)No.19619 of 2015)
BY ADVS.
SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P).
SRI.R.S.KALKURA
SRI.M.S.KALESH
SRI.HARISH GOPINATH
SMT.R.BINDU
SMT.P.ANJANA
SRI. RAJ MOHAN, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) WAS FINALLY HEARD ON 12.02.2025
ALONG WITH DBP NO.9 OF 2016, THE COURT ON 13.03.2025 PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
4
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 22ND PHALGUNA, 1946
DBP NO. 9 OF 2016
IN THE MATTER OF TDB REPORT No.9 of 2016 IN COMPLAINT NO.87
of 2014 RELATING TO TRESSPASS OF DEVASWOM LAND - MUKKANNUR KOOTTALA
SREE BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE
PETITIONER:
TEMPLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MUKKANNUR KOOTTALA SREE BHAGAVATHY TEMPLE
KOTHAKULANGARA SUB GROUP, PARAVOOR GROUP REPRESENTED
BY ITS PRESIDENT AND SECRETARY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
ERNAKULAM.
3 THE TAHSILDAR ALUVA TALUK
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KOTHAKULANGARA VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT.
5 SRI. A.P.RAMAN NAIR
5
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
S/O PARAMESWARAN NAIR, AMBATTU VEEDU, MOOKKANNOOR PO,
ERNAKULAM,(R2 TO R5 ARE SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER 5.12.2016 IN DBP NO.9 OF 2016)
5TH RESPONDENT IS RECORDED AS DIED AS PER ORDER DATED
5.7.2022 IN DBP NO.9 OF 2016.
6 ADDL R6- P.P PONNAMMA
W/O LATE A.P. RAMAN NAIR, AMBATTU HOUSE, MOOKANNUR
P.O., PIN- 683572
7 ADDL R7- MINI R.NAIR
D/O LATE A.P. RAMAN NAIR, AMBATTU HOUSE, MOOKANNUR
P.O., PIN-683577
8 ADDL R8- SMITHA R NAIR
D/O LATE A.P. RAMAN NAIR, AMBATTU HOUSE, MOOKANNUR
P.O., PIN-683577 (LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
DECEASED 5TH RESPONDENT ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL
R6 TO R8 AS PER ORDER DATED 05/07/2022 IN DBP 9/2016
BY ADVS.
SRI.M.V.S.NAMBOOTHIRI, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD
SRI.R.S.KALKURA
SRI.M.S.KALESH
SRI.K.SASIKUMAR, SC, TDB
SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P)
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. S. RAJMOHAN, SR. GP; SRI. G. SANTHOSH KUMAR, SC,
TDB; SRI. P. RAMACHANDRAN, AMICUS CURIAE
THIS DEVASWOM BOARD PETITION WAS FINALLY HEARD ON 12.02.2025
ALONG WITH WP(C)No.19619 of 2015, THE COURT ON 13.03.3025 PASSED
THE FOLLOWING:
6
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Muralee Krishna, J.
W.P.(C)No.19619 of 2015 is filed by the Temple Advisory Committee and also a devotee of Koottala Sree Bhagavathi Temple, Mookkannur, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 4 to 7 to take action in pursuance of Ext.P1 judgment dated 26.11.1993 of this Court in TDB No.12 of 1993 and Ext.P4 report dated 31.01.2014 submitted by the Land Special Officer for recovery of the properties belonging to the temple in question by invoking the provisions under Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 and the Rules made thereunder.
2. DBP No.9 of 2016 is registered suo motu based on TDB Report No.9 of 2016 dated 04.02.2016 submitted by the learned Ombudsman for Travancore and Cochin Devaswom Board on the basis of complaint No.87 of 2014 filed before the learned Ombudsman raising the allegation of encroachment over the Devaswom properties and inaction on the part of the officials.
7 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Since the issue involved in the writ petition and the DBP is one and the same, they are being disposed of by way of this common judgment/order. For convenience parties to this writ petition and DBP are hereinafter referred to in their status as they are in the writ petition.
3. Going by the averments in the writ petition and in the complaint, the petitioners are the devotees of Koottala Bhagavathi Temple which is a temple under the management of the 1 st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board. The temple has been functioning as Melekavu and Kizhekavu Kshetram and it owns nearly 4 acres of land in old Sy.Nos.736/8A, 8B,8C and 1134/2A, etc. The grievance of the petitioners is that the 8 th respondent trespassed into 2 Acres of property belonging to Temple.
According to the petitioners as per Ext.P1 order dated 26.11.1993 in TDB No.12 of 1993, this Court directed the District Collector, Ernakulam to take steps to evict the encroachers from the property of the Devaswom invoking the provisions under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957. Since the direction in Ext.P1 8 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 was not complied for a lengthy period, the devotees of the temple approached the Devaswom Authorities by filing Exts.P2 and P3 representations dated 25.06.2013 and 13.03.2014 respectively.
The 7th respondent Land Special Officer submitted Ext.P4 report dated 31.01.2014 after inspecting the property concerned wherein it was requested that the 5th respondent Tahsildar has to conduct a survey and demarcate the land belonging to the Devaswom and thereafter initiate eviction proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act. Since no further steps were taken on Ext.P4 report, the petitioners approached this Court by filing the above writ petition and also filed the complaint before the learned Ombudsman.
4. On 01.11.2018, as per the order in I.A.No.3 of 2018 additional respondents 9 to 13 were impleaded in the writ petition.
5. Respondents 1 to 3, 8 and 9 to 13 filed separate counter affidavits opposing the pleadings in the writ petition. By producing Exts.R8(a) to R8(g) documents along with the counter affidavit, the 8th respondent contended that the 8th respondent has been 9 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 enjoying the property having an extent of 52.611 cents in Sy.No.736/8A as absolute owner. He has affected mutation of the property in his name and no one else has got any right over the said property. Paragraphs 5 to 19 of the counter affidavit filed by 8th respondent read thus;
"5. The writ petition has to be dismissed in limine for the reason that there is no person called Sreedharan Nair, S/o. Sankaran Nair, Madathil House, Mokkannoor PO, Angamally. The only person who is son of Sankaran Nair in the above address is Sashidharan Nair. The petitioner should be personally asked to appear and show his identity before this Hon'ble Court. The Writ Petition has been filed in a false name probably to hide the identity of the petitioner.
6. In this connection it is pertinent to note that the 1 st respondent had initially initiated proceedings before the District Collector under section 14 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act as proceedings number D.Dis 10605/65/02 which was disposed of by the District Collector vide order dated 11.12.1965 holding that the property in the possession of the 8th respondent was not liable to be resumed under section 14 of the Land Reforms Act on the ground that 49.280 cents has been occupied by Raman Nair and his family for the past 35 years by way of lease from the Devaswom and that the Temple in question viz.10 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Thazhathukavu Temple which is situated in a prominent portion of the remaining land is only a sub temple of Karottukavu Temple located nearly a furlong south east and that Thazhathukavu Temple is surrounded by well built compound wall with footpath having 10 feet width around, and that the land occupied by Sri Raman Nair and his family on lease is not needed for the purpose of extending the place of public religious worship and that the request of the Superintendent of Devaswom for obtaining the certificate was not bona fide and in the above circumstances the request for certificate under Section 14 of Act 1 of 1964 was rejected. True copy of the proceedings of the District Collector, Ernakulam in D.Dis 1605/65/02 dated 11.12.1965 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R8(a). Readable copy of the proceedings of the District Collector, Ernakulam in D.Dis 1605/65/02 dated 11.12.1965 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R8(b).
7. Subsequently, yet another proceeding was initiated by the Superintendent of Devaswom, Parur Group of the 1 st respondent as proceedings No.D Dis 23100/68 which was considered by the District Collector, Ernakulam who disposed of the same by an order dated 27.12.1968 once again rejecting the application of the Devaswom under Section 14 holding that even if any space was required for expanding the facilities which are apparently not of a nature related to specifically to the needs of public religious 11 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 worship in the Thazhathukavu Temple it can be had from the Devaswom compound which is spacious. True copy of the order dated 27.12.1968 in D. Dis. 23100/68 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R8(c). Readable copy of the order dated 27.12.1968 in D. Dis. 23100/68 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R8(d).
8. The plea of the petitioners are barred by principles of resjudicata, estoppel and abandonment by virtue of Exhibit R8(a) and R8(c) proceedings.
9. This Hon'ble Court has already considered the right, title, interest of the 8th respondent in respect of 52.611 cents in Re-Survey No.292/6, Old Survey No.736/8A of Mukkannoor Village in the order dated 14.7.1995 in TDB12/93, 27/94 and 60/95. The petitioners have suppressed the judgment and filed the present writ petition. In this connection, it is submitted that 52.611 cents in Re-Survey No.292/6Old Survey No.736/8A of Mukkannoor Village originally was in the actual possession and enjoyment of Parameswaran Nair, the father of the 8th respondent during his younger days and was cultivating the said property. Subsequently, the said property came into the possession of the 8th respondent in the year 1955 and the present 8th respondent has been in absolute possession and enjoyment of the said property ever since and dealing with the same as absolute owner thereof. The said land was styled as "pandaravaka sreepandara kariyam cheyerakal" in the settlement register.12 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
10. The 8th respondent had submitted an application before the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam for grant of 'patta' as OA 592/1980, the same was disposed of by issuing assignment certificate bearing No.191/1989 dated 13.7.1989. The patta was granted in favour of 8th respondent. At the same time, it is pertinent to note the Devaswom authorities had also instituted O.A. 365/1965 before the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam for resumption of land. O.A. 365/1965 filed by the Devaswom Board against the 8th respondent for resumption was dismissed. The patta in favour of the 8 th respondent has become final. The present Writ Petition is also barred by virtue of the decision in O.A. 365 of 1965 dismissing the application filed by the Devaswom Authorities for resumption.
11. It is pertinent to note the devotees of Koottala Bhavati Temple had filed a complaint before this Hon'ble Court alleging that there was trespass into the temple property. Pursuant thereto the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, North Paravur vide his letter dated 28.8.1993 had complained against encroachment in respect of 1 acre 25 cents of land in Re-Survey No. 292/6, 292/10, 292/12 (Old Survey No.736/8) of Mukkannoor Village. This Hon'ble Court passed an order on 26.11.1993 as per which the District Collector, Ernakulam was directed to take effective steps to evict the encroachers and report to the court on or before 3.1.1994 as is evidenced by Exhibit P1. Pursuant 13 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 thereto the District Collector enquired and the land in question was measured out the entire temple property with the help of Taluk Surveyor and also based on revenue records maintained by the revenue authorities and came to the conclusion that the occupant of Res-Survey No.292/6 the present 8th respondent had obtained property by virtue of purchase certificate 191 of 1989 in O.A. No.592 of 1980 on the file of Land Tribunal, Ernakulam. The District Collector was of the opinion that the petitioner and other occupants of the properties covered in Resurvey No.292/6, 292/10 and 292/12 including the 8th respondent herein are not unauthorized occupants and that they were legal owners of the property and question of eviction of encroachment does not arise.
12. The District Collector submitted a report before this Hon'ble Court dated 31.12.1993 in TDB12 of 1993 to that effect. True copy of the report dated 31.12.1993 of the District Collector, Ernakulam addressed to Registrar, High Court of Kerala in TDB12 of 1993 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R8(e). The Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court subsequently passed a common order dated 14.07.1995 in TDB12 of 1993, 27 of 1994 and 60 of 1994 holding that the possession of property having 52.611 cents in the possession of the 8th respondent is based on valid title on the strength of purchase certificate issued by the Land Tribunal and the orders had become final and that 14 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Devaswom was not in a position to take any steps to retrieve these properties. The Court also opined that it cannot be said that there was any encroachment of temple properties and no steps could be taken against these persons including the 8th respondent. True copy of the order dated 14.07.1995 of the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in TDB12 of 1993, 27 of 1994 and 60 of 1994 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R8(f).
13. It is again pertinent to note that after Exhibit R8(f) decision, the Devaswom Board with the intention of protecting their property with the help of the District Collector, Taluk Surveyor and other revenue authorities demarcated delineated Devaswom properties fixed survey stones and have constructed compound walls enclosing the temple property on all four sides. The property in the possession of the 8th respondent falls outside the temple boundary.
14. The averments in para 1 of the writ petition are incorrect and denied. The temple has absolutely no right whatsoever over the property of 52.611 cents in Re-Survey No.292/6, Old Survey No.736/8A of Mukkannoor Village. The temple or the devotees have no right over the same. The right, title, interest and possession over the above said properties has vested with the 8th respondent. The said property was never used for any temple purposes and the allegations with regard to the same are without any basis.15 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
15. The averments in para 2 of the writ petition are incorrect and are denied. The petitioner has suppressed the true facts with regard the orders passed in TDB12/1993. The subsequent order of this Division Bench dated 14.7.1995 which seals the fate of the claim of the petitioner has been deliberately concealed. Further, petitioner had also suppressed the fact that pursuant to the order of this Hon'ble Court, the properties have been surveyed, measured out, enquired into and a report submitted by the District Collector, Ernakulam detailing the true facts. This Hon'ble Court has relied on the report of the District Collector and has passed an order dated 14.07.1995 holding the Devaswom has no right over the property in the possession of the 8th respondent.
16. The allegation that no effective steps have been taken to ensure eviction of encroachers and protection of Devaswom properties is totally false for the reasons already stated supra. The Exts.P2,P3 and P4 have already become infructuous in view of the order dated 14.07.1995 of the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in TDB12 of 1993, 27 of 1994 and 60 of 1994 i.e. Exhibit-R8(f).
17. From Ext-P4 produced along with the writ petitioner purported to the report of Special Officer, Travancore Devaswom Board, has no significance and cannot be accepted for any purpose as the same has been prepared with ulterior objects completely concealing the orders of this 16 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Hon'ble Court as well as the report of the District Collector. Under any circumstances, the report of the District Collector and the order of this Hon'ble Court produced along with the counter overrides the observations in Ext-P4 especially in view of the fact that they have become final. The matter regarding the possession of the property by the 8th respondent is not liable to be reopened and that too after 27 years. The petitioner has been enjoying and dealing with the property of 52.11 cents comprised in Survey No. 736/8A as absolute owner thereof and no one else has any manner of right over the same.
18. It is again pertinent to note that the 8th respondent has effected mutation in his name and is paying tax in respect of 52.611 cents in Re-Survey No.292/6, Old Survey No.736/8A of Mukkannoor Village. True copy of the tax receipt dated 5.7.2016 issued by the Village Officer, Mukkunnoor Village, Angamaly is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R8(g).
19. The petitioner is in this Writ Petition is Sashidharan Nair, S/o. Sankaran Nair who is the cousin-brother of the 8th respondent. There has been long standing family dispute and enmity between the petitioner and the 8th respondent. It is probably for that reason that Sashidharan Nair has filed the writ petition in a false name. The President of the Ksethra Upadeshaka Samiti of Koottala Bhagavathi Temple is Sashidharan Nair and not Sreedharan Nair as shown in 17 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 this writ petition. Hence it is essential that appropriate criminal proceedings should be launched for impersonation before this Hon'ble Court."
6. On 29.09.2021 it was reported that the 8th respondent is no more. On 05.07.2022 the legal representatives of deceased 8th respondent were impleaded as additional respondents 14 to 16.
7. Along with the counter affidavits filed by respondents 9 to 13 they have produced Exts.R9(a) to R9(p) documents and contended that respondents 10 to 12 have not encroached upon any portion of the temple property. Paragraphs 5 to 14 of that counter affidavit read thus:
"5. It is submitted that 178 cents equivalent to 72.06 ares of property was obtained by Chandrasekharan Nair, my husband as per Sale Deeds No.1604 of 1978, 2325 of 1978 and 2336 of 1978 of the Angamaly Sub Registry Office. Out of the total 178 cents, 89 cents of property was obtained by my husband, the father of respondents 10 to 13 by virtue of Sale Deed No.1604 of 1978 of the Angamaly Sub Registry Office. The aforesaid 89 cents of property comprised in old Survey No. 736/8 A2, A1, and Resurvey No. 292/12 of Mukkannoor Village originally belonged to Vareed Thoma. Vareed Thoma had obtained the said property as per Exchange Deed No. 2131 of 1962 dated 11.6.1962 of the 18 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Angamaly Sub Registry Office. True copy of the Exchange Deed No. 2131 of 1962 dated 11.6.1962 of the Angamaly Sub Registry Office is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (a). While so, on the death of the aforesaid Vareed Thoma, his wife, Mariakutty, applied for assignment of the said property before the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam and the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam vide Purchase Certificate dated 21.2.1978 had assigned the said property admeasuring 89 cents in survey No. 736/8 of Mukkannoor Village in her favour. True copy of the certificate dated 21.2.1978 issued by the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam in favour of Mariakutty is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (b). Thus, the aforesaid Mariakutty obtained absolute right, title, interest and possession over the aforesaid 89 cents by virtue of the aforesaid Exhibit 8 (b) Purchase Certificate. While so, the aforesaid Mariakutty vide Sale Deed No. 1604 of 1978 dated 6.5.1978 transferred the aforesaid 89 cents of property in favour of Chandrasekharan Nair, my husband and the father of respondents 10 to 13. Thus, Chandrasekharan Nair obtained absolute, right, title, interest and possession over the said property of 89 cents of property. No one else have any manner of right, title, interest over the same. Chandrasekharan Nair was in absolute possession and enjoyment of the above said 89 cents of property and was dealing with the same as absolute owner thereof.
6. This apart, Chandrasękharan Nair also purchased another 19 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 89 cents adjoining the aforesaid property covered by Exhibit R8 (b) as per Sale Deed No. 2325 of 1978 and 2336 of 1978 of the Angamaly Sub Registry Office executed by Sita and Lekshmi separately in favour of Chandrasekharan Nair. True copy of the Sale Deed bearing No. 2325 of 1978 dated 5.7.1978 executed by Sita in favour of Chandrasekharan Nair is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (c). True copy of the Sale Deed bearing No. 2336 of 1978 dated 5.7.1978 executed by Lekshmi in favour of Chandrasekharan Nair is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (d). The aforesaid Lekshmi and Sita had obtained the said property by virtue of the Partition Deed No. 155 of 1975 entered into between Sita, Lekshmi and other members of their family. True copy of the Partition Deed No. 155 of 1975 dated 15.01.1975 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9
(e). The aforesaid 89 cents in Survey No. 736/8A was obtained by the family of Sita and Lekshmi by virtue of Thanathu Pattom issued by Mukkannoor Koottala Devaswom. Subsequently after obtaining 89 cents of property referred above to their share Sita and Lekshmi filed applications before the Land Tribunal, Ernakulam for assignment of property in their favour and by virtue of Certificate dated 08.06.1976 44½ cents of property comprised in Survey No. 736/8A was assigned in favour of Sita by the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms). True copy of the Certificate dated 8.6.1976 issued by the Special 20 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Tahsildar (Land Reforms) in favour of Sita is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (f). Likewise Lekshmi was assigned 44½ cents in Survey No. 736/8A by the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) by virtue of Certificate dated 8.6.1976. True copy of the Certificate dated 8.6.1976 issued by the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) in favour of Lekshmi is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (g).
7. The aforesaid Chandrasekharan Nair therefore obtained absolute right, title, interest and possession over 1 acre 78 cents as per documents referred above and he was in absolute possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid property and dealing with the same as absolute owner thereof. Aforesaid Chandrasekharan Nair has effected mutation and was paying tax for the said property. True copy of the Tax Receipt No.25 dated 23.3.1985 issued by the Village Officer Mukkannoor is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (h). True copy of the Tax Receipt No.2 dated 8.3.1994 Village Officer Mukkannoor is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (i). True copy of the Tax Receipt No.87 dated 23.3.2000 issued by the Village Officer Mukkannoor is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9
(j). True copy of the Tax Receipt No.2977969 dated 6.12.2007 issued by the Village Officer Mukkannoor is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (k). While so, on a measurement carried out by Chandrasekharan Nair, it was found that though the documents and title deeds show 21 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 the extent of property as 178 cents actually on measurement the extent was only 117.3 cents. My husband Chandrasekharan Nair passed away on 16.1.1985, on his death the property devolved on his legal heirs viz. myself his wife and three daughters and a son who are respondents 9 to 13 herein. Subsequently, the legal heirs of deceased Chandrasekharan Nair entered into a Partition Deed as Deed No. 4277 of 2012.
8. After the death of my husband, a Partition Deed was entered into as Deed No. 4277 of 2012 dated 3.10.2012 as per which the aforesaid 1 acre 78 cents as per Title Deed which was estimated at 117.3 cents as per actual measurement was allotted to the share of my daughters, Hemakumari, Geetha Devi and Dr. C. Sheela who are respondents 10, 11 and 12 respectively allotted to their share as Schedule No. 1 to the 10th respondent, Schedule No. 2 to the 11th respondent and Schedule No.3 to the 12th respondent. The 10th respondent obtained 16.61 ares in Re- survey No. 292, Sub No. 11/2, Old Survey No. 736, Re- survey Block No. 15 allotted to her share as Schedule No. 1. The 11th respondent obtained 16.55 ares in Resurvey No. 292, Sub No. 12/2, Old Survey No. 736, Re-survey Block No. 15 allotted to her share as Schedule No. 2. The 12 th respondent obtained 6.71 ares and 7.62 ares in Re-survey No. 292, Sub No. 11/3 and 12/3, Old Survey No. 736, Re- survey Block No. 15 allotted to her share as Schedule No. 3.
22 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 The respondents 10 to 12 have been in absolute possession and enjoyment of the said property right from the date of partition and dealing with the same as absolute owners thereof and have effected mutation in the revenue records. True copy of the tax receipt dated 23.11.2018 in the name of 10th respondent issued by the Village Officer, Mukkannoor Village is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9 (l). True copy of the tax receipt dated 23.11.2018 in the name of 11th respondent issued by the Village Officer, Mukkannoor Village is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9(m). True copy of the tax receipt dated 23.11.2018 in the name of 12th respondent issued by the Village Officer, Mukkannoor Village is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R9(n). The property in the possession of respondents 10 to 12 which originally belonged to Chandrasekharan Nair is clearly demarcated and delineated by well defined boundaries. The adjacent property on the north and west belongs to the Devaswom. The property of respondents 10 to 12 is clearly demarcated and delineated on all four sides by aged old boundaries. The property of the Temple and the property of the respondents is also demarcated by a compound wall constructed by the Devaswom on the north and west. At all points of time, the property in the possession of the respondents and their predecessor in interest were never treated as a Temple property and never used for any religious or ritual purposes. The property in the possession 23 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 of the respondents and their predecessors in interest have been always put to exclusively for agricultural purposes. Late Chandrasekharan Nair after the purchase of the said land has converted the same into a Jathika plantation and there are over 60 Jathika trees aged over 40 years and also other trees like high yielding Jack fruit trees and mango trees, 15 coconut trees and 20 plantains.
9. It is submitted that the property in the possession of respondents 10 to 12 obtained by them as per Partition Deed referred above is clearly demarcated and delineated by compound walls and is lying as a separate property by itself. The said property has nothing to do with Temple activities and was never put to use of any religious purpose at any point of time. On all sides of the property in the possession of respondents 10 to 12 there are roads. The Temple property on the West and East is clearly demarcated and delineated by well defined compound walls. The property in the possession of respondents 10 to 12 does not touch the Temple property and exists separately as a distinct property.
10. The petitioners have suppressed material facts and have alleged falsehood. The entire history regarding the said property have been deliberately suppressed with a view to make a false claim over the same.
11. The plea of the petitioners are barred by principles of res judicata, estoppel and abandonment by virtue of Exhibit R9(a) and R9(c) proceedings.
24 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
12. It is pertinent to note the devotees of Koottala Bhavati Temple had filed a complaint before this Hon'ble Court alleging that there was trespass into the temple property. Pursuant thereto the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner, North Paravur vide his letter dated 28.8.1993 had complained against encroachment in respect of 1 acre 25 cents of land in Re-Survey No. 292/6, 292/10, 292/12 (Old Survey No.736/8) of Mukkannoor Village. This Hon'ble Court passed an order on 26.12.1993 as per which the District Collector, Ernakulam was directed to take effective steps to evict the encroachers and report to this Hon'ble Court on or before 3.1.1994 as is evidenced by Exhibit P1. Pursuant thereto the District Collector enquired and the entire land in question belonging to the temple was measured out with the help of Taluk Surveyor and also based on revenue records maintained by the revenue authorities and came to the conclusion that the occupant of Survey No.292/12 Mariakutty had obtained title over the property by virtue of Purchase Certificate 4 of 1978 in SMP No. 78 of 1978 for an extent of 89 cents of land in Survey No. 736/8 of Mukkannoor Village which was purchased by my husband as per Document No. 1604 of 1978 and that the same was in the possession of the legal heirs of late Sri Chandrasekharan Nair. It is pertinent to note that in respect of other 89 cents which was purchased by Chandrasekharan Nair, the same was also obtained by virtue of Purchase Certificate No. 4827 25 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 and 4828 dated 8.6.1976 issued in the name of Sita and Lekshmi by the Deputy Collector, Land Tribunal, Ernakulam in their favour. The District Collector came to the conclusion that late Chandrasekharan Nair and other occupants of the property could not be termed as unauthorised or encroachers and they were the legal owners of the property and question of eviction of encroachment does not arise. The District Collector submitted a report before this Hon'ble Court dated 31.12.1993 in TDB12 of 1993 to that effect. True copy of the report dated 31.12.1993 of the District Collector, Ernakulam addressed to Registrar, High Court of Kerala in TDB12 of 1993 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit- R9(o).
13. The Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court subsequently passed a common order dated 14.7.1995 in TDB12 of 1993, 27 of 1994 and 60 of 1994 holding that the possession of property having 52.611 cents in the possession of the 8 th respondent is based on valid title on the strength of purchase certificate issued by the Land Tribunal and the orders had become final and that Devaswom was not in a position to take any steps to retrieve these properties. The Court also opined that it cannot be said that there was any encroachment of temple properties and no steps could be taken against these persons including the 8th respondent. True copy of the order dated 14.7.1995 of the Division Bench of this Hon'ble Court in TDB12 of 1993, 27 of 1994 and 60 26 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 of 1994 is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit-R9(p).
14. It is again pertinent to note that after Exhibit R9(p) decision, the Devaswom Board with the intention of protecting their property with the help of the District Collector, Taluk Surveyor and other revenue authorities demarcated delineated Devaswom properties fixed survey stones and have constructed compound walls enclosing the temple property on all four sides. The property in the possession of respondents 9 to 12 falls outside the temple boundary."
8. Respondents 1 to 3, in their counter affidavit contended that the purchase certificate issued in the instant case to the party respondents is without notice to the Travancore Devaswom Board.
Paragraphs 3 to 12 of that counter affidavit read thus:
3. It is submitted that Mookkanoor Koottala Devaswom in Kothakulangara Sub Group of Paravoor group was originally a P.D Devaswom Controlled and administered by the Travancore Devaswom Board. The Devaswom consists of two temples namely Melekkavu Devi and Kizhekkavu Devi.
The Kizhekkavu Devi temple is situated in the north western side of Melekkavu at a distance of less than 100 meters. Both temples jointly constitute the Mookkanoor Koottala Devaswom. The Devaswom is hundreds of years old having rich heritage of it's own and once it was the main place of 27 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 worship for the people of the entire locality of Mookkanoor village and beyond.
4. It is submitted that Melekkavu temple is situated almost beneath a banyan tree of hundreds of years of age and this banyan tree with it's ritualistic importance is believed to have stayed as a companion to the Devi who later began to be known as Mookkanoor Koottala probably to mean ആൽ കൂട്ടായ ദേവി. People consider Kizhekkavu Devi as the elderly sister of Melekkavu Devi. A Kottaram spacious Ara is also situated on the property. The Ara was used for the storage of paddy measured for the land held by the Devaswom. Now the Kottaram is used for the residence of the Priest of the Temple. This Devaswom owned hundreds of Acres of landed property under Thanathu classification as well as other favourable tenures including pandaravaka pattom, otti, karam etc., as it is evident from the settlement records. The Devaswom lost the entire property including Thanathu lands having some small parcels of land held as Kshethram irippu and its appurtenant lands.
5. It may be noted that the Board had converted this PD Devaswom as scheduled one with effect from 01/04/1989 vide letter No:ROC 7149/86/PD dated 17/03/1989 addressed to the Devaswom Commissioner. Further details such as enlistment of the Devaswom in the schedule Under Section 58 of the TCHRI Act, 1950 or the details of the property held at the time of conversion etc., are not 28 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 available. The Kshethram Iruppu land and appurtenant properties should be with Devaswom at the time of conversion as scheduled Devaswom. Even after bringing it under the category of the scheduled Devaswom, conditions of the Temple or its Management did not improve much. These two temples were facing decay and degeneration and Travancore Devaswom Board reconstructed the temples and no other construction works are pending. This being originally a PD Devaswom, the Devaswom Officials were expected to maintain a Thanathu Land Register of the lands belonging to the Devaswom. Later when the temple was converted into scheduled Devaswom, Thanathu Land Register should come in the place of the relevant land register of the Devaswom. The enquiry conducted by the Land Special Officer revealed that the Devaswom does not have an authoritative Thanathu Land Register either in the Office of the Assistant Devaswom Commissioner or in the Sub Group Office and probably this absence of records may be due to the passage of this much of time. However some old records available in the Devaswom showing the details of land account is also taken into account for verifying the claim of Devaswom over its property. The position of Thanathu Register/Land Register being so recourse was made in the settlement records prepared in pursuance to the settlement of 1061 ME.
6. It is submitted that the Settlement Records as well as the 29 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 details collected from the Devaswom at the time of enquiry and inspection revealed that the following parcels of land in Kothakulangara Village of Aluva Taluk belonged to the above Devaswom.
Sl No. Old Extent
Description/Remarks
Sy No.
I.Melekavu
1. 736/2B 0.71.000 Koottala Devaswom
Vaka Thanathu
2. 736/8B 2.21.000 Pandaravaka Otti/
Koottala (Part of 2.72 Acre) Mookkannoor
Kshethram and Devaswom Irippu
Kottaram
II.Kizhakkekavu 736/8A 1.52.000 Sarkar thanathu/
1. (Part of 3.7 Acre) Sreepandarakariyam
Cheyyarkkal
Kizhakkekavu
Kshethram Irippu
and Devaswom
pond etc.
(As regards the land in Old Sy No.1134/2A of Kothakulangara Village mentioned in the land complaint no records could be found out at the time of enquiry and inspection).
The landed property as mentioned above legitimately belonged to the above Devaswom and the Devaswom was holding the same at the time when it was converted to a scheduled Devaswom envisaged Under Section 58 of TCHRI Act, 1950.
30 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Due to the re-organization of revenue villages, the temple is now situated in Mookkanoor Village of Aluva Taluk. The re-survey records in force for the above village for Block No:15 reveal the land account of the Melekavu Devaswom as follows:
Sl No. Re-sy Extent
Description/Remarks
No. H.A.Sq. M. Shown in B.T.R.
1. 270/1 0.75.75(1.87.103)
Puramboke/Sarkar
2. 270/2 0.56.65(1.39.926)
Purayidom/Mookkannoor
Koottala Devaswom
As regards the land account of Melekavu temple, the area shown in favour of Devaswom agrees with the old land account. But the land in re-survey No:270/1 measuring 75.75 ares (1.87.103 Acres) is recorded in the B.T.R. as puramboke/sarkar. This is an error in the re-survey records. The land belongs to the Devasswom and it is in the possession and enjoyment of melekavu Devi temple. The entry in the B.T.R. has to be corrected in the name of Mookkanoor Koottala Devaswom as in the case of entry for re-survey No:270/2. No encroachment is noticed. Anyhow, survey and demarcation is necessary to verify whether the Devaswom is holding the entire land as recorded in the re- survey records. As regards the land account of Kizhekavu Devi temple, the re-survey sketch and B.T.R. shows serious discrepancies and irregularities. As per the re-survey 31 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 records, the following parcels of land are accounted in favour of Kizhekkavu Temple in Block No:15 of Mookkanooor Village.
Sl No. Re-sy Extent Description/Remarks
No. HA Sq.M Shown in B.T.R
1. 292/5 0.12.00(29 cent) Poramboke/Sarkar
Kulam
2. 292/6 0.21.30(53 cent) Purayidom/Koottala
Devaswom
3. 292/7 0.05.20(13 cent) Poramboke/Sarkar
4. 292/10 0.07.60(19 cent) Sarkar/vazhi
5. 292/12 0.24.20(60 cent) Purayidom/Koottala
Devaswom
The co-relation of old survey number shown in the re- survey records are not fully correct.
7. It is submitted that the land (in SL.No:3) in R.S. No:292/7 measuring 0.05.20 Ares is the actual kshethram irippu land. In the B.T.R., this property is recorded as poramboke/vazhy. Even the name of temple or its existence on this plot of land actually stretches upto the public road running on the eastern side allowing entry and exit of the devotees of the Devaswom. A kanikkavanchi is also put up at the entrance at the road point. The maramath wing, of Travancore Devaswom Board has constructed the 32 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 compound wall for the temple property. After the completion of temple compound wall, some temple property happened to fall outside the compound wall especially in the southern and western side of temple land. In the western side, the distance between compound wall and the Sreekovil is less than 2.50 metres. At this position, it is impossible for the devotees to make a peaceful and convenient Darshan before the deity facing the west nor they can take a predikshanam of the Sreekovil after prayer.
8. It may be noted that the land (in Sl.No.l) in Re.Sy. No:292/5 measuring 12 Ares where the temple pond is situated and it is recorded as Poramboke/Sarkar/Kulam in the re-survey records. This is the only holy pond for the two temples. The temple and the pond is divided and separated by the land comprised in Re.Sy No:292/6 which is registered in the name of Devaswom but under illegal occupation of one Raman Nair. To reach the pond for a holy dip, a devotee has to cross the temple land at the mercy of the encroacher. It is learned that the temple and the pond were situated in the same parcel of land comprised in Old Sy.No:736/8A and the property between the temple and the pond is under encroachment. The land (in SLNo.2) in Re.Sy.No:292/6 measuring 21.30 ares is recorded as Purayidom/Koottala Devaswom in the Re-Survey records. This area of the property in its present lie and shape starts from the public road in the east and it is situated around 33 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 the kshethram irippu land. Enquiry shows that the property belonging to the Devaswom was illegally occupied by one Raman Nair. Though the property is registered in the name of the Devaswom in the re-survey records, it is under illegal occupation.
9. It is submitted that the land (in SL.No:4) in Re.Sy. No.292/10 measuring 7.60 are is Sarkar/Vazhy as per Re- survey records. As pointed out earlier, the temple property is stretching to the public road in the east. The land is recorded as sarkar/vazhy in Re.Sy.No:292/10 and it is actually temple land belonging to Koottala Devasom. The re-survey authorities are not justified in generating such irregular survey sub division on temple property. The property (in Sl.No:5) comprised in Re-Survey No:292/12 measuring 24.20 ares is recorded in the name of Koottala Devaswom. But it is on the illegal possession of strangers. Another irregularity noticed is with respect to the land comprised in Re.Sy.No.292/8 with the original area noted as 95.10 ares. But subsequently the original area is seen altered and increased as 96.98 ares as per some survey proceedings. All these points has to be confirmed by fresh survey and demarcation. Enquiry revealed that the temple land comprised in Re.Sy.No:292/6 measuring 21.30 ares though registered in the name of Devaswom is in the illegal occupation of A.P. Raman Nair, Ambattu House, Mookkannoor. The land in Re-Sy.No:292/12 measuring 34 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 24.20 ares registered in the name of Devaswom as per B.T.R. is also in the unauthorized possession of strangers, It is learned that the forgery and manipulations in respect of the temple property were the result of a fraud played by one P.G. Balakrishnan Nair (late) who worked in various posts in the revenue establishment of Aluva Taluk and retired from service as Deputy Tahsildar. He is found to be a close relative and associate of the illegal holders of temple land in Re-Sy. No:292/6 and 292/12.
10. Noticing the land complaints and other irregularities in the administration of Devaswom, the devotees filed a complaint before this Hon'ble Court which was taken in the proceeding of the Hon'ble Court as TDB No.12/93. In the judgment dated 26/11/1993, the Hon'ble High Court among other things, directed the Travancore Devaswom Board to pursue further action in the petition filed before the District Collector, Ernakulam for eviction under KLC Act and also directed the District Collector, Ernakulam to take appropriate steps in that behalf and report to the court regarding the steps taken in the matter on or before 03/01/1994 and also directed to send a copy of the order to the District Collector, Ernakulam. Inaction in the matter was for the sole reason that the revenue officials were behind the fraud and foul play on temple land. Kizhekkavu Devi temple (Mookkanoor Koottala) Devaswom is entitled for lawful ownership, possession and enjoyment of an 35 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 extent of 1.52 acres of land in old Sy.No:736/8A of Mookkanoor Village as its Kshethram irippu land. The area of kshethram irippu land has been alarmingly reduced to 62 cents in Re.Sy.No:292/5, 292/7 and 292/10 (including a pathway of 19 cents) making it impossible for the temple to function under minimum standard facilities. Enquiry conducted by the Land Special Officer and site inspection revealed that the portions of land belonging to Kizhekavu temple are merged and included in the parcels of land recorded under the re-survey Nos.292/4,292/6,292/8 292/11 and 12.
11. The Purchase Certificates issued in the instant case is without notice to the Travancore Devaswom Board and therefore the issue is squarely covered by the decisions rendered by this Hon'ble Court in Travancore Devaswom Board v. Mohanan Nair [2013 (3) KLT, 132] Gopalakrishnan A.A v. Secretary, Cochin Devaswom Board Thrissur and others [2018 (3) КНС 549 (DB)].
12. Under the above circumstances, it would be just and proper if the Special Tahsildar, KLC conducts a survey and demarcation of the land belonging to Mookkanoor Koottala Devaswom with due regard for the old survey/revenue records that existed prior to the coming into force of re- survey records and initiate the LC proceedings for the recovery of Devaswom land under encroachment and restore the same as early as possible."
36 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
9. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, the learned Standing Counsel for Travancore Devaswom Board, the learned Senior Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the party respondents.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioners argued that as per Section 3(1)(x) of Kerala Land Reforms Act, the provisions of Land Reforms Act shall not be applicable to tenancies in respect of premises of any temple including sites belonging to a temple and sites of office buildings and other buildings attached to such temples created by the owner, trustee or manager of such temple and hence the purchase certificate claimed as obtained by the party respondents has no legal validity. By relying on Section 14 of Kerala Land Reforms Act, the learned counsel argued that the 1st respondent Devaswom Board has a duty to resume the land encroached upon by the party respondents.
11. On the other hand, the learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that the Land Conservancy proceedings cannot be initiated to evict the party respondents who are occupying the 37 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 land on the strength of purchase certificate obtained under the provisions of Land Reforms Act. The petitioners are also parties to TDB No.12 of 1993 and hence they are aware about the purchase certificate issued to the party respondents. Therefore, the remedy available to the 1st respondent Travancore Devaswom Board or the petitioners is to initiate appropriate proceedings against the encroachers either by approaching the appellate authority constituted under Land reforms Act or the Civil Court.
12. The contention of the petitioners in the above writ petition and DBP is that the official respondents are not taking steps to evict the encroachers from the Devaswom property as directed in Ext.P1 order of this Court. But the contentions raised in the counter affidavits filed by the respondents and the materials produced by them would show that the party respondents had obtained a purchase certificates for the property in their possession under the provisions of Land Reforms Act. This fact was reported to this Court in TDB No.12 of 1993 by the official respondents. The operative portion of Ext.R9(P) order dated 38 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 14.07.1995 in TDB No.12 of 1993 passed by this Court reads thus:
"From the above facts, it is clear that 52.611 cents is in possession of Raman Nair and 89 cents of land is in possession of Chandrasekharan Nair. Both these persons have got valid title to the property. They are not encroachers as alleged in the complaint. The Land Tribunal has issued purchase certificates to the tenants in respect of these properties. Those orders have become final and we do not think that the Devaswom is in a position to take any steps to retrieve these properties. It cannot be said that there is any encroachment of temple properties. So, no steps could be taken against these persons."
13. From the findings in Ext.R9(P) order it is clear that the official respondents cannot evict the party respondents from the property in their respective possession invoking the provisions under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, 1957 and the rules made thereunder. However, the perusal of Ext.R9(p) judgment would make it clear that the tenancy right or the entitlement of the persons namely Raman Nair and Chandrasekharan Nair mentioned therein to obtain purchase certificates in respect of the properties in question was not an issue in that TDB. It was for the reason of obtaining the purchase certificate under the provisions of the 39 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 Kerala Land Reforms Act by those persons, the Division Bench held that it cannot be said that there is any encroachment of temple properties. Against the issuance of purchase certificate to the tenant under the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, by the Land Tribunal, the remedy lies in the said Act itself by way of an appeal under Section 102 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act before the Appellate Authority concerned. Similarly, in deserving cases civil remedy can also be availed from the competent civil court.
Therefore, no relief can be granted to the petitioners by invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
14. Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and the submissions made at the Bar, we find that the petitioners have not made out sufficient grounds to allow the above writ petition and the DBP.
In the result, the writ petition as well as the DBP stands dismissed, however, granting liberty to the petitioners to initiate appropriate proceedings before the Appellate Authority 40 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 constituted under the provisions of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, or if entitled, before the competent civil Court, in accordance with law.
Sd/-
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE
MSA
41
W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015
and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19619/2015
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN T.D.B NO 12/1993 DATED 26/11/1993 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER,DATED 25/06/2013 EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER,DATED 13/03/2014 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT ,DATED 31/01/2014 RESPONDENT EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R9(A) TRUE COPY OF THE EXCHANGE DEED NO 2131 OF 1962 DATED 11.6.1962 OF THE ANGAMALY SUB REGISTRY OFFICE EXHIBIT R9(B) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 21.2.1978 ISSUED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM IN FAVOUR OF MARIAKUTTY EXHIBIT R9(C) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO 2325 OF 1978 DATED 5.7.1978 EXECUTED BY SITA IN FAVOUR OF CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR EXHIBIT R9(D) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO 2336 OF 1978 DATED 5.7.1978 EXECUTED BY LEKSHMI IN FAVOUR OF CHANDRASEKHARAN NAIR EXHIBIT R9(E) TRUE COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO 155 OF 1975 DATED 15.1.1975 EXHIBIT R9(F) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 8.6.1976 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS) IN FAVOUR OF SITA EXHIBIT R9(G) TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 8.6.1976 ISSUED BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS) IN FAVOUR OF LEKSHMI EXHIBIT R9(H) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.25 DATED 42 W.P(C)No.19619 of 2015 and DBP No.9 of 2016 2025:KER:20921 23.3.1985 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER MUKKANOOR EXHIBIT R9(I) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.2 DATED 8.3.1994 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER MUKKANNOOR EXHIBIT R9(J) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO 87 DATED 23.3.2000 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER MUKKANNOOR EXHIBIT R9(K) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.2977969 DATED 6.12.2007 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER MUKKANNOOR EXHIBIT R9(L) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.11.2018 IN THE NAME OF 10TH RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUKKANNOOR VILLAGE EXHIBIT R9(M) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.11.2018 IN THE NAME OF 11TH RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUKKANNOOR VILLAGE EXHIBIT R9(N) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 23.11.2018 IN THE NAME OF 12TH RESPONDENT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUKKANNOOR VILLAGE EXHIBIT R9(O) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 31.12.1993 OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM ADDRESSED TO REGISTRAR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN TDB 12 OF 1993 EXHIBIT R9(P) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14.7.1995 OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN TDB 12 OF 1993, 27 OF 1994 AND 60 OF 1994