Kerala High Court
K Nandakumar vs The Sub-Registrar, Thriprayar on 5 September, 2024
Author: Murali Purushothaman
Bench: Murali Purushothaman
2024:KER:67365
1
RP NO. 452 OF 2024
in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
THURSDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 14TH BHADRA, 1946
RP NO. 452 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN WP(C) NO.21624 OF 2021 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/S:
K NANDAKUMAR
AGED 62 YEARS
KATHAKKAL HOUSE, EDAMUTTOM P.O. THRISSUR., PIN - 680568
BY ADVS.
MANU GOVIND
S.SABARINADH
AYESHA MARIA JOHN
RESPONDENT/S:
THE SUB-REGISTRAR, THRIPRAYAR
OFFICE OF THE SUB-REGISTRAR, THRIPRAYAR, E TIPPUSULTAN
ROAD, THRIPRAYAR, PIN - 680576
BY SR.G.P.SMT.MARY BEENA JOSEPH.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.09.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
2024:KER:67365
2
RP NO. 452 OF 2024
in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021
ORDER
The Review Petition is filed against the order dated 17.10.2023 in W.P.(c) No.21624/2021. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner for the following relief:-
i) issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding the Respondent to register Exhibit P1 Deed of Settlement, within a time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court in accordance with law;
2. On 17.10.2023, this Court passed an interim order in the writ petition as follows:-
"Admit.
2. The learned Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent stating that Ext. P1 settlement 2024:KER:67365 3 RP NO. 452 OF 2024 in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021 deed cannot be registered since the petitioner has not produced the relevant revenue records for the purpose of registration.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will produce necessary revenue documents and Power of Attorney, before the respondent.
If the petitioner produces the required documents, respondent shall take necessary steps to register Ext. P1 as and when presented. "
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the review petitioner that the respondent is refusing to register the Settlement Deed by directing the petitioner to produce revenue records to prove his title in the property. The learned counsel refers to the Judgments of this Court in Sumathi and Another v. State of Kerala and Others [2018 (5) KHC 586] and Balachandran V. Sub Registrar 2024:KER:67365 4 RP NO. 452 OF 2024 in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021 [2023 (4) KLT 479] and submits that the Sub Registrar is not legally justified in insisting that the executant should produce prior title deeds to satisfy the title and ownership of the property before he could register the deed concerned.
4. A counter affidavit had been filed in the writ petition by the respondent wherein paragraphs 5 and 6 read as follows:-
"5. But so far they have not submitted any application to revenue authorities to mutate the property. There is no revenue records to prove their right in the property. Accordingly, to Kerala Registration Manual Order, Order No.44 points to be ensured before acceptance.(a) Each documents shall before acceptance be examined to ensure
(iii) That the certificate of wealth and other taxes as contemplated in Rule 30(iii) of the registration rules if any has been produced.
6. There were many incidents to the past 2024:KER:67365 5 RP NO. 452 OF 2024 in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021 where registering officers faces disciplinary actions and suspension for registering documents without checking the right of people transferring the land. If the petitioners are ready to bring the document with the revenue records to prove their right in the property this office will take necessary steps to register it as per law".
5. The learned Government Pleader points out that the interim relief prayed for by the review petitioner is the main relief in the writ petition and the interim order has practically disposed of the writ petition. It is also pointed out that the order impugned was passed on the submission of the petitioner that he will produce necessary revenue documents before the respondent.
In the light of the averments in paragraphs (5) and (6) of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent in the writ petition and in the light of the 2024:KER:67365 6 RP NO. 452 OF 2024 in W.P.(C) No.21624/2021 decisions cited by the petitioner, I recall the order dated 17.10.2023 in W.P.(C) No. 21624/2021 with liberty to the petitioner to move a fresh interlocutory application for appropriate relief. The Review Petition is disposed of.
Post the writ petition as per roster.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE al/-.