Kerala High Court
Public Interest Protection ... vs State Of Kerala & Ors on 2 February, 2021
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2021 KER 702
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly
W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :1:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
TUESDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 13TH MAGHA,1942
WP(C).No.21045 OF 2007(S)
PETITIONER/S:
PUBLIC INTEREST PROTECTION ASSOCIATION
REG.NO.1-7/84, MUNNAR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
V.MOHANKUMAR, ENGAN HOUSE,, HRC ROAD, MUNNAR,
KERALA-685 612.
BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2 THE PRINCIPLE SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
3 THE LAND BOARD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
IDUKKI.
5 THE DIRECTOR
SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS DEPARTMENT,,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.
W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :2:
6 ADDL. R6 R7 IMPLEADED:
KANNAN DEVAN HLLS PLANTATION CO.PVT. LTD,
KDHP HOUSE, MUNNAR-685 612, REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSISTANT
MANAGER (SIED) MR.C. SREEKUMAR.
IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL 6TH RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED
20/09/2007 IN IA.12593/2007.
7 TATA TEA LIMITED,
SPECIAL PROJECTS OFFICE, GENERAL HOSPITAL COMPLEX,
MUNNAR-685 612, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER-ADMINISTRATION
MR.PRATAP RAMDAS.
[ADDL. R7 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 20/09/2007 IN
IA.12436/2007.]
R1 TO R5 BY SRI. MOHAMMED ANZAR, SPL. GOVERNMENT PLEADER
R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA
R1 BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE SR.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.MATHEWS K.UTHUPPACHAN
R6 & R7 BY SRI. ISAAC THOMAS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.02.2021, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :3:
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2021.
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
The petitioner Association, which is a Social Service Organisation registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific, Cultural and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955, has filed this writ petition as a Public Interest Litigation seeking the following reliefs:
1. Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside Ext.P13.
2. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1, 4 and 5 to carryout a land survey as envisaged under Section 6 of the KDH (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971 and demarcate the boundaries of each parcel of land vested with the Government under Section 3(1) and restored under Section 4 forthwith.
3. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1 and 4 to assign land in KDH village as envisaged in Section 9 of the KDH (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971.
4. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing respondents 1 and 4 not to evict persons in possession of land prior to W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :4: 21/1/1971 and those who have been possession certificates issued under Ext.P6 and further regularise their possession by assignment of land in their possession.
2. The basic contention is that Ext.P13 order issued by the State of Kerala for the detection of bogus pattas and eviction of encroachers in Kannan Devan Hills Village of Devikulam Taluk, is illegal and arbitrary. According to the petitioner, such an exercise would be futile as the survey records in respect of the Village dates back to nearly a hundred years. It is submitted that no survey of the region, except in respect of the inter party boundaries, had been conducted after independence. So also, it is submitted that the State of Kerala had enacted Kannan Devan Hills (Resumption of Lands) Act, 1971 ('Act, 1971' for short) more than 3 decades ago and as per Ext. P1 award under Section 4 of the Act, the Land Board had decided the extent of land that would vest with the Government, that would not be vested with the Government and that would be restored to Kannan Devan Hill Produce Company.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that despite the mandate of Section 6 of Act, 1971, the land vested with the Government and restored to the Company has been demarcated, and though Section 9 of the Act envisages for the reservation of land for agricultural purposes, reservation of W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :5: land for the welfare of the Agricultural population and assignment of remaining lands to agriculturists and agricultural labourers, no effective steps are taken by the State in contemplation of the said laws.
4. The sum and substance of the contention advanced is that the State Government has failed to implement the requirements of Section 9 of Act, 1971 and therefore, Ext. P13 Government Order has no manner of co- relation to the purpose sought to be achieved by the Act, 1971.
5. The petitioner has also narrated the facts, figures and data in respect of the total extent of land that is held by the Kannan Devan Hill Produce Company and other facts and figures towards the attempt to establish the contention that unless and until necessary survey is conducted in accordance with the provisions of Act, 1971, no purpose would be served by issuing peremptory directions by the State Government in Ext. P13.
6. A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the State Government refuting the allegations made in the writ petition and objecting to the reliefs sought for by the petitioner stating that the writ petitioner and the alleged predecessors in interest are claiming huge extents of land in Munnar on the basis of sham and fraudulent documents of title namely Document Nos.380/1976 and 381/1976 of SRO Devikulam. As per Document No.380 of 1976 dated 31.12.1976, a Deed of Transfer was made between the Kannan W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :6: Devan Hills Produce Company Limited, a Company registered under the Companies Act of the United Kingdom and having its Registered Office at Hellenic House, 87-97 Bath Street, Glasgow 02 202 Scotland and a place of business in India at 2, Netaji Subhash Road, Calcutta on one part (Vendor) and Tata Finlay Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and having its Registered Office at Bombay House, Bombay (purchaser) on the other part to sell all the immovable properties of the Vendor in the State of Kerala and the goodwill of business carried on by the Vendor in India, at the consideration of 1,58,41,825/- and Re. 1/- for the goodwill of the said business. The said document of title has been executed by the foreign company namely KDHP Ltd., which is registered in U.K. purporting to transfer huge extents of Government lands to the prejudice of the State's interest and public interest.
7. Reliance has been placed in respect of the recitals in Ext.R1(a), document No.380/1976 dated 31.12.1976 of SRO, Devikulam, and it reads thus:
"(6) in terms of the Exchange Control Act, 1947 and or Section 482 of the Income and Corporation Taxes Act, 1970 of the United Kingdom the consent of the Bank of England and her Majesty's Treasury in the United Kingdom has been obtained by the Vendor for the sale of the undertaking including the entire assets and liabilities in India of the Vendor as aforesaid".
According to the first respondent, the recitals are liable to be held as fraud W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :7: perpetrated on the Constitution of India by a foreign company over the lands in India in 1976. This shows that the foreign company had indulged in transferring immovable properties in India after getting approval of the British authorities. The recitals mentioned are a direct affront to the sovereignty of independent India and the Constitution of India.
8. It is also submitted that the claim of the writ petitioner that Tata Tea Limited is a successor in interest of the KDHP Co. Ltd. and Anglo Indian Direct and Amalgamated Tea Company, which were Sterling Companies incorporated in England, cannot have any legal backing, since the alleged succession is not as per Sections 391 to 395 of the Companies Act, 1956. Moreover, the said succession has not been approved by the Reserve Bank of India under Section 31 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. It is further submitted that the order of the Land Board dated 29.03.1974 relating to an extent of 57359.14 acres, wherein the lands were exempted and restored to KDHP Co. Ltd., if at all done, is liable to be held as not binding on the Government, since the order has been issued in favour of a foreign company incorporated in England, which is not entitled to hold or possess any lands in the territory of Union of India.
9. It is further submitted that the deed itself expressly recites that no sanction of the State Government or the Central Government in any manner W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :8: has been obtained for the transfer of various estates situated in Kerala by the foreign company. The consideration part also reveals that the entire consideration was treated as an unsecured loan to be repaid after collecting the entire amount through public issue and collecting the said amounts from the public to be paid to the foreign company within a period of 5 years on annual instalment basis.
10. According to the first respondent, a foreign company had, thus, indulged in illegal transfer of huge extents of Government land including "Munnar Town" as described in the schedule with scant regard to the entire sovereign system of Independent India, which has been illegally grabbed by the company based on the said fraudulent document. Since the entire transaction is based on fraud, misrepresentation and grabbing of the Government lands, the Government is raising serious objections in granting reliefs to the writ petitioners.
11. In respect of the land covered by Ext.R1(a) Document, the land transferred was by the Anglo American Direct Tea Trading Company Limited in favour of Tata Finlay Limited. The said document also reveals recitals that are anti national, anti sovereign, thereby constituting fraud on the Constitution of India. The recitals are illegal, fraudulent and unconstitutional. The vendor of the document has transferred an extent of 5250.06 àcres in W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 :9: gross violation of the Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act and the Kerala Land Reforms Act, and has even transferred Kuthakapattom lands and encroached lands. The recitals read thus:
"The schedule above referred to: All those pieces or parcels of land measuring 4575. 18 acres approximately in possession of the vendor (but according to title deeds, an area of 5250.06 acres approximately) known as Devikulam Periya Kanal and Pallivasal Estates, (which includes an area of 3.87 acres in Periya Kanal Estate and 12.39 acres in Pallaivasal Estate held under Kuthakapattaom grants, an area measuring 369.92 acres approximately in Periya Kanal Estate and 176.70 approximately in Pallivasal Estate having been declared to vest in the Government under the Kerala Private Forest Vesting and Assignment Act, 1971 and in dispute before the Palghat Tribunal constituted under the said Act, an encroached area measuring 4.84 acres in Pallivassal Estate and an area measuring 42.94 acres in Periakanal Estate declared by the Land Board as surplus under the Kerala Land Reforms Act 1963)".
Therefore, it is contented that the recitals in Document No.381/1976 of SRO Devikulam, which is produced as Ext.R1(b) also is a direct challenge to the sovereignty of India and the Constitution of India.
12. Thus, it is submitted that an amount of Rs.14,25,771/- has been paid in the Central Stamp Depot, Thiruvananthapuram under Sl. No. 41080/29/12/76 and the same has been engrossed on the paper, which shows that no procedure contemplated under the Kerala Stamp Rules for W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 10 : presentation of documents for adjudication of stamp value on instruments by the proper officer, who is the Collector, has been done in respect of the deed which has been executed outside the Kerala State. The deed has been executed on 31.12.1976 in Calcutta as is revealed from the recitals in the deed. Hence, as per Rule 12 of the Kerala Stamp Rules, 1960, the affixing of impressed stamp can be effected only after a duly executed instrument is received in the State of Kerala which can only be after 31.12.1976. Since gross violation of proper stamping of the documents has been resorted to by the executants, the same amounts to an invalid document, which cannot be recognized in any Courts in India. The same invites appropriate penal action against the Company. The very same procedure has been adopted in respect of the document executed on 31.12.1976 and registered as document No.381/1976, wherein no power of attorney or duly constituted attorney as envisaged under Section 28 of FERA for executing documents is seen effected. The common seal of the vendor company is also significantly missing. The impression of stamp as per the Kerala Stamp Rules has been grossly violated inviting appropriate penal action.
13. It is further submitted that the registration procedure adopted in registering both the documents with the Sub Registrar of Devikulam reveals shocking state of affairs which throws more and more light on the fraudulent W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 11 : nature of the documents and the conduct of the writ petitioner Company and the predecessor in interest in grabbing Government lands. It is submitted that a scrutiny of the Powers of Attorney said to have been presented on behalf of the executants of the documents shows that the Powers of Attorney have not been executed at all as required under the Rules. Ext. R1(d) is the copy of the relevant pages of Power of Attorney executed by S.K. Mehera in favour of P. Somasundaram Pillai on behalf of the KDHP Company bearing registration No. 1977 dated 05.04.1977 and presently available in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Devikulam. Ext.R1(e) is the copy of the relevant pages of Power of Attorney executed by S.Puri in favour of P. Somasundaram Pillai on behalf of the KDHP Company registered as No. 1977 dated 05.04.1977 and presently available in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Devikulam. Ext.R1(f) is the relevant pages of a similar Power of Attorney executed by the Purchaser (S. Puri) in respect of the sale of immovable property by the Anglo American Direct Tea Trading Company Limited. Ext.R1(g) is the copy of the relevant pages of similar Power of Attorney executed by the Purchaser (S.K. Mehera) in respect of the sale of immovable property by the Anglo American Direct Tea Trading Company Limited. The revenue stamps appended in the Powers of Attorney are not even seen cancelled. A scrutiny of the Thumb Impression Register also showed that the Powers of Attorney holders had not affixed their thumb impression and there is no signature of W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 12 : one of the presenters. This also casts doubt on the authenticity of the documents relied on and the procedures adopted, it is contended. Ext.R1(h) is the relevant page of the Thumb Impression Register. It is pertinent to note that both the purchaser and the vendor belong to the same address, namely, 2 Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Road, Calcutta in the Powers of Attorney. It shows that the entire operation of registration of the documents is clouded in mystery, fraudulent in nature and intended to grab precious Government lands, it is contended. Therefore, the documents of title dated 31.12.1976 registered as deed Nos.380/1976 and 381/1976 are fraudulent and sham documents which do not create any right, title, interest, possession or otherwise over the lands covered by the document. The foreign company had indulged in the illegal transfer of huge extents of Government land including "Munnar Town '' as described in the schedule with scant regard to the entire sovereign system of Independent India. Since the entire transaction is based on fraud, misrepresentation and grabbing of Government lands, the respondents raise serious objections in granting reliefs to the writ petitioners. It is submitted that respondents are raising the very question of title of the writ petitioner, maintainability of the writ petition and eligibility of the petitioner to challenge the various executive actions undertaken as per the law by the respondents. It is also submitted that the very same issue was considered by this Court in W.P.(C) Nos. 14242, 21864 W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 13 : & 27662 of 2010 and it was dismissed as infructuous as per judgment dated 07.12.2015. Ext.R1(i) is the argument note submitted by the Special Government Pleader (Revenue) in the aforesaid cases.
14. Therefore, it is the case of the respondents that the very question of title based on fraudulent and sham documents as claimed by the writ petitioners is liable to be considered by this Court as a preliminary issue. It is contended that without considering the issue raised by the respondents, any consideration of the subsequent issue or contentions raised by the writ petitioner will have a serious prejudice on the interests of the Government. Hence, the respondents seek consideration of the issue of eligibility and legality of the claims of the writ petitioner over large extent of lands now illegally occupied and prayed that the contentions raised in the writ petition may be considered only after settling the primary issue of question of title of the writ petitioner.
15. Heard the respective counsel appearing on either side, and perused the pleadings and material on record .
16. At the outset it is made clear that, the issues raised in this writ petition and the counter affidavit regarding title etc narrated as above was the subject matter of various other writ petitions in different contexts and therefore, we make it clear that if there are any specific directions issued in W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 14 : any writ petitions by this Court, the same shall alone be followed while considering the directions hereinafter issued.
17. Anyhow, as per the order of this Court dated 13.07.2007, the petitioner was permitted to delete prayer Nos. V(a) and V(d), and notices were issued to the respondents only in regard to the prayer Nos. V(b) and V(c) and therefore, the legality of Ext P13 order of the State Government is not a subject matter of consideration before us. The rival submissions made by the parties in the writ petition and the counter affidavit would make it clear that the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the State Government to conduct a survey in terms of the Act, 1971. Therefore, according to the petitioner, unless and until the survey is conducted, the requirements contained under Section 9 of Act, 1971 is unable to be implemented by the Government and until such time, no fruitful purpose would be served by implementing Ext. P13 order of the State Government dated 17.02.2007.
18. We are not going into the details in respect of the rival submissions, since we propose to dispose of the writ petition, in view of the present state of affairs submitted before this Court on the basis of the instructions imparted by the Survey Director, Thiruvananthapuram to the Advocate General stating that the survey in respect of the Kannan Devan Hill W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 15 : Village was prepared in the year 2007, however it has not been finalised, and now steps are being taken to finalise the same. It is also specified thereunder that 525 appeals were received after the publication of the notification in regard to the Kannan Devan Hills Village as per the provisions of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 and out of which, 426 complaints were finalised and steps are being taken to finalise the remaining 99 applications by verifying the title documents produced by those persons. It is also stated thereunder that an Advisory Committee with the Sub Collector, Devikulam as the Chairman is authorized to verify the title documents of such persons. It is also undertaken thereunder that as and when the files are received from the Advisory Committee, steps would be taken to finalise the survey proceedings in accordance with the Act, 1971.
19. In that view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that no purpose would be served by keeping this writ petition pending before this Court and it can be disposed of issuing appropriate directions.
Therefore, after evaluating the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Pratap and the learned Special Government Pleader Sri. Mohammed Anzar, we dispose of the writ petition directing the State Government to secure necessary reports from the Advisory Committee in regard to the pending complaints as specified above, finalise the proceedings W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 16 : in regard to the measurements stated to be carried out in accordance with the Act, 1971, and take a final decision in the matter after providing necessary notice of hearing to all stakeholders at the earliest and, at any rate, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 17 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21045/2007 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE LAND BOARD DATED 29-03- 1974.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 4-08-1975 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MUNNAR DATED 11-04-1980.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 9-2-1994 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF GO DATED 17-05-1996 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 7-7-1997 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 A TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF GO DATED 7-07-1997 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 25-08-1998 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTE PUT UP BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 1-8-2001 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 17-12-04 EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DATED 8-09-2006 FILED BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NUMBERED AS C. 2326/06.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 30-11-2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF GO DATED 17-2-007 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 18 :
EXHIBIT P13(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF GO DATED 17-2-2007 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 5-3-2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 14-3-2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION 4-5-2007 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 10-05-2007 ISSUED TO ONE S AYYADURAI PILLAI.
EXHIBIT P17(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF NOTICE DATED 10-05-2007 ISSUED TO ONE S. AYYADURAI PILLAI.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R1 (a) A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 380/1976 OF SRO DEVIKULAM CONTAINING RELEVANT PAGES ONLY EXHIBIT R1(b) A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 381/1976 OF SRO DEVIKULAM CONTAINING RELEVANT PAGES ONLY.
EXHIBIT R1(c) A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED TO THE FOREIGN COMPANY NAMELY KANNAN DEVAN HILLS PRODUCE COMPANY LIMITED , 22 WEST NILE STREET, GLASGOW, U.K TO HOLD IMMOVABLE PROPERTY IN INDIA.
EXHIBIT R1(d) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY S.K MEHERA IN FAVOUR OF P. SOMASUNDARAM PILLAI DATED 05-04--1977 AND RPESENTLY AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEVIKULAM.
EXHIBIT R1 (e) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY S.PURI IN FAVOUR OF P. SOMASUNDARAM PILAI ON BEHALF OF THE KDHP COMPANY W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 19 : REGISTERED AS NO. 1977 DATED 05-04-1977 AND PRESENTLY AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEVIKULAM.
EXHIBIT R1(f) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF A SIMILAR POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE PURCHASER (S PURI) IN RESPECT OF THE SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY BY THE ANGLO AMERICAN DIRECT TEA TRADING COMPANY LIMITED EXHIBIT R1(g) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF SIMILAR POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE PURCHASER (S.K MEHERA) IN RESPECT OF THE SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY BY THE ANGLO AMERICAN DIRECT TEA TRADING COMPANY LIMITED.
EXHIBIT R1(h) A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THUMB IMPRESSION REGISTER.
EXHIBIT R(i) A TRUE COPY OF THE ARGUMENT NOTE SUBMITTED BY THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER (REVENUE) IN W.P.(C) NO 14242/2010, W.P(C) NO 21864/2010 AND W.P(C) NO.
27762/2013.
EXHIBIT R1 AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE SIXTH RESPONDENT, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, DEVIKULAM FILED IN W.P(C) NO.
29463/2015 ON 02-12-2015.
EXHIBIT II A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 381/1977 OF SRO DEVIKULAM (EXHIBIT R 6(J).
EXHIBIT III TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 380/77 OF SRO DEVIKULAM (EXHIBIT R6 (K).
EXHIBIT RIV TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 3704/1994 EXECUTED UNDER THE GUISE OF RECTIFICATION DEED (EXHIBIT R6(l). EXHIBIT V TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 29-09-2015 IN W.P(C) NO. 29463/2015.
EXHIBIT VI TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 07-10-2015 IN W.P(C) NO 29463/2015.
EXHIBIT VII TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 09-11-2015 IN W.P(C) NO. 29463/2015.
EXHIBIT VIII TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 02-12-2015 IN W.P(C) NO. 29463/2015.
W.P.(C) No. 21045/2007 : 20 :EXHIBIT R6(j): TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE DOCUMENT NO.381/1977 OF SRO, DEVIKULARM.
EXHIBIT R6(k): TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.380/77 OF SRO, DEVIKULAM. EXHIBIT R6(l): TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO. 3704/1994 EXECUTED UNDER THE GUISE OF RECTIFICATION DEED.
/True Copy/ P.S To Judge.
rv