Kerala High Court
Roy Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 22 September, 2025
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025
1
2025:KER:71192
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 31ST BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025
PETITIONER:
ROY THOMAS
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O THOMAS, RESIDING AT PAMPACKAL HOUSE, KARIVEDAKAM P.O,
KASARGOD DISTRICT,, PIN - 671541
BY ADV SRI.B.SAJEEV KUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT.
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 695001
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KASARAGOD DISTRICT, COLLECTEROTE, KASARAGOD, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT,, PIN - 671123
3 THE TAHSILDAR (LR)
TALUK OFFICE, KASARAGOD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT,, PIN - 671123
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KARIVEDAKAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ANAKKAL P.O, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT,, PIN - 671541
5 *ADDL. R5. THRESYAMMA
W/O LATE P.T THOMAS, PAMBAIKAL HOUSE, KARIVEDAKAM, KASARGOD-
671541.
6 *ADDL. R6, BENNY YANE MATHEW
S/O.THOMAS, BADEKKARA HOUSE, THANGADI TALUK, KOKKODA,
KARNATAKA-574196.
7 *ADDL. R7 SHIMMY AUGUSTINE .
W/O.AUGUSTINE THOMAS, THANNIYIL HOUSE, CHENGALA, KASARAGODE
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025
2
2025:KER:71192
671 541 .[*ADDL. R6 TO 7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
DATED 19.06.2025 IN I.A. 1/2025 OF WPC 9753/2025]
BY ADV SHRI.LEJO JOSEPH GEORGE
SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR. GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025
3
2025:KER:71192
JUDGMENT
The petitioner sought for mutation of the property on the strength of Ext.P1 Will. Going by the recent judgment of this Court in the case of Babu R. v. State of Kerala reported in 2024 KHC 7141, notice was issued to the other legal heirs by the Village Officer concerned. Accordingly, respondents 5, 6, and 7 appeared and objected to the claim based on Ext.P1 Will. Thereafter, nothing is done by the Village Officer concerned, is the grievance of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks a mandamus directing the 3rd respondent- Tahsildar, to effect the mutation of the property, on the strength of Ext.P1 Will.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader on behalf of respondents 1 to 4, and also the learned counsel appearing for respondents 5 to 7.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that going by the directions contained in paragraph no. 17 of Babu R. (supra), if no Civil Suit is filed within the period WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:71192 of three months from the date of objection, the transfer of registry sought for can be allowed, treating the case as an uncontested one, as envisaged in clause (ix) of paragraph No.17. Admittedly, no Civil Suit is filed by respondents 5, 6 and 7, wherefore, the petitioner is entitled to the transfer of registry, per force of the direction contained in the clause (ix) of paragraph no.17 of Babu R.(supra).
4. Learned counsel for respondents 5, 6, and 7 would submit that, going by clause (viii), the Village Officer is bound to give a direction to the legal heirs to file a declaration within three months, to the effect that a Civil Suit has been instituted before the competent court challenging the Will. The same has not been done by the Village Officer, which is the reason why respondents 5, 6, and 7 have not filed a Civil Suit. Unless and until such a direction is forthcoming, the three months period cannot be reckoned, is the submission made by the learned counsel for respondents 5, 6, and 7.
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:71192
5. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the application for mutation Ext.P3 was filed on 19.12.2024, the objection was registered on 04.02.2025, and the Writ Petition was filed on 10.03.2025. A direction to file declaration was not given by the Village Officer concerned, only because of the pendency of the Writ Petition, is the submission made by the learned Government Pleader.
6. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court finds that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is meritorious enough to be accepted. It cannot be countenanced for a moment that respondents 5, 6 and 7 have failed to challenge the Will by filing a suit within the period of three months for want of a direction from the Village Officer concerned, in terms of clause (viii) of paragraph no.17. The right of respondents 5, 6, and 7 to challenge Ext.P1 Will is an independent right and the same cannot depend upon directions, if any, to be issued WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025 6 2025:KER:71192 by the Village Officer concerned. The moment respondents are notified of the existence of Ext.P1 Will, and so long as they maintain the stand that Ext.P1 is not a genuine Will, it is up to them to raise an appropriate challenge to the same by instituting a Civil Suit before the competent Civil Court. The same having not been done, the directions contained in clause (ix) of paragraph No. 17 will operate, enabling the petitioner to get transfer of registry effected, treating the case as an uncontested one. This Court also takes stock of the fact that effecting mutation in the name of the petitioner would not jeopardize any of the rights of respondents 5, 6, and 7 in raising an appropriate challenge to Ext.P1 Will before the competent court. This Court further records that merely by posing an objection to a registered Will, the rights which are sought to be conferred on the strength of such a Will cannot be stalled. Thus, without prejudice to the right of respondents 5, 6, and 7 to take appropriate action as per law against Ext.P1, in case WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025 7 2025:KER:71192 they are advised to do so, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent to effect transfer of registry in favour of the petitioner on the strength of Ext.P1 Will. The Writ Petition is allowed as indicated above.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
AP/22-09 JUDGE
WP(C) NO. 9753 OF 2025
8
2025:KER:71192
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 953/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE WILL REGISTERED AS 17 OF 2003 OF
UDUMA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER'S FATHER ON 17/03/2003 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE WILL REGISTERED AS 18 OF 2003 OF UDUMA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER'S MOTHER ON 15/03/2003.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 19/12/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.