Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

Radhamani V.B vs State Of Kerala on 6 October, 2021

Author: Devan Ramachandran

Bench: Devan Ramachandran

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          RADHAMANI V.B,
          D/O VANAJAKSHI AMMA,
          VAKKAYIL HOUSE, KOTHAKULANGARA,
          ANGAMALY P.O, PIN-683572, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          WILSON URMESE
          MANU HORMIS WILSON


RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA,
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD P.O, PIN-682030,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

    3     THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          FORT KOCHI, PIN-682001, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

    4     THE SUB REGISTRAR,
          SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, ANGAMALY P.O, PIN-683572,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

          SMT. SURYA BINOY- SR. G.P


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021
                                   -2-

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with a limited plea that her Statutory Appeal preferred under Section 28A of the Kerala Land Tax Act before the 2nd respondent - District Collector, against Ext.P2 notification issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), Fort Kochi, be directed to be taken up and disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The learned Senior Government Pleader - Smt.Surya Binoy, submitted that if the petitioner only requires Ext.P3 appeal to be taken up and disposed of by the 2nd respondent, there does not appear to be any legal impediment in doing so; however, praying that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations in her favour in this judgment and leave it to the said Authority to take an apposite decision, as per law. She, WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021 -3- however, added that the District Collector may also be allowed liberty to verify whether Ext.P3 appeal has been filed within time.

Taking note of the afore submissions, I allow this writ petition and direct the 2nd respondent - District Collector, to take up Ext.P3 appeal of the petitioner and dispose it of in terms of law, after affording her necessary opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, the District Collector will be at liberty to dispose of Ext.P3 in any manner as is permissible in law; and clarify that I have not considered any of the contentions of the rival parties on its merits.

After I dictated this part of the judgment, Sri.Manu Hormis Wilson - learned counsel for the WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021 -4- petitioner, relying on Exts.P4 and P5 judgments of this Court, prayed that a direction be issued to the 4th respondent - Sub Registrar, to register the Conveyance Deed, with respect to the property covered by Ext.P1, at the value now fixed through Ext.P2, under protest; and that if the District Collector is to find in his client's favour, then necessary proceedings be ordered to be issued for refund of the excess stamp duty, in terms of law.

The learned Senior Government Pleader did not oppose the afore plea, presumably because of the directions in Exts.P4 and P5 judgments.

In the afore circumstances, I further direct the 4th respondent - Sub Registrar, to allow registration of the document to be presented by the petitioner, based on the value showed in Ext.P2; however, making it clear that in the event the District Collector is to find in favour of the petitioner, then necessary action for refund of WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021 -5- the excess stamp duty shall be initiated and completed in terms of law, without any avoidable delay thereafter by the competent respondent or Authority.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv WP(C) NO. 21320 OF 2021 -6- APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21320/2021 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF PARTITION DEED NO.1221/2002 DATED 29.04.2002 OF SRO, ANGAMALY.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 31.03.2020 OF THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 02.08.2021, BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.08.2014 IN WPC NO.21488/2014. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02.11.2020 IN WPC NO.23367/2020. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE