Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.45 seconds)
Documents citing The Revenue Div. Officer Fort Kochi &Ors vs Jalaja Dileep on 7 August, 2014

M/S Patel Real Estate Developers Pvt. ... vs State Of Kerala on 29 September, 2014

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they are entitled for a declaration from this Court in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another [2014 (1) KLT 161), to effectuate changes in the Basic Tax Register as the properties have been reclaimed long before the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short the "Act 28 of 2008"). It is further submitted, without prejudice to the petitioners' right as above, for seeking a declaration, the petitioner is entitled to convert or utilise the above land for any other purposes other than for cultivating food crops, as these properties are no longer fit for any cultivation.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document

M/S Patel Real Estate Developers Pvt. ... vs State Of Kerala on 29 September, 2014

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that they are entitled for a declaration from this Court in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another [2014 (1) KLT 161), to effectuate changes in the Basic Tax Register as the properties have been reclaimed long before the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short the "Act 28 of 2008"). It is further submitted, without prejudice to the petitioners' right as above, for seeking a declaration, the petitioner is entitled to convert or utilise the above land for any other purposes other than for cultivating food crops, as these properties are no longer fit for any cultivation.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document

Geetha. P.S vs State Of Kerala on 21 November, 2014

8.In the light of the provisions as above, I am of the view that the petitioner can approach the District Collector, Ernakulam with a request in terms of Clause 6 of the KLUO. If the request is so received from the petitioner, the Collector shall consider the same after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Needful shall be done within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the application. It is made clear that this writ petition is disposed W.P.(C).No.9831/2014 -:5:- without prejudice to the petitioner's right to establish any claim based on Jalaja Dileep's case (supra). No costs.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document

Shanavas Aged 34 Years vs The State Of Kerala on 20 August, 2014

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they are entitled for a declaration from this Court in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another [2014 (1) KLT 161), to effectuate changes in the Basic Tax Register as the property has been reclaimed long before the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short the W.P(C).No.19771 of 2014 2 "Act 28 of 2008"). It is further submitted, without prejudice to the petitioner's right as above, for seeking a declaration, the petitioner is entitled to convert or utilise the above land for any other purposes other than for cultivating food crops, as the property is no longer fit for any cultivation.
Kerala High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document

M/S.Fairlead Logistics & Traders (P) ... vs State Of Kerala on 21 November, 2014

The petitioners 1 to 12 are having absolute ownership and possession of total 219.039 ares of land lying together with a common compound wall in Kottuvally Village, Paravur Taluk, Ernakulam District. The 1st petitioner is in absolute owner ship of 59.148 ares of land lying in Sy.Nos.398/1A, 1, 329/1A 396, 398/3. 398/4, 398/3 329 1A, 329/1A 407, 398/1A5-1, 398/5, 397/1A4-1 in Kottuvally Village in Paravur Taluk. The 2nd petitioner is in absolute ownership of 3.541 ares of land in Sy.Nos.398/1A1, 398/1A3 of Kottuvally Village. The 3rd petitioner is in absolute ownership and possession of 9.011 ares of land in Sy.Nos.398/1A1, 398/1A3, 398/1A4, 398/1A5 of Kottuvally Village. The 4th petitioner is in absolute ownership and possession 15.18 ares of land in Sy.Nos.398/4 of Kottuvally Village. The 5th petitioner is in absolute ownership and possession of 7.59 ares of land in Sy.Nos.398/3, 398/4 of Kottuvally Village. Petitioners submit that they are W.P.(C).No.27298 of 2014 2 entitled for declaration in view of the judgment of this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another [2014 (1) KLT 161) to classify the above land as dry land. According to the petitioner, this property is shown as 'nilam' in the BTR. It is submitted that the entire property is lying as Purayidam and the same has been reclaimed before the enactment of Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008. However it is submitted that without prejudice to the above claim of the petitioners the petitioners may be permitted to approach the District Collector Ernakulam for reclaiming the land for other purposes in terms of Clause 6 Kerala Land Utilisation Order.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document

P.K.Assan Koya vs The District Collector on 4 November, 2014

4. In any event, since there is controversy as to the nature of land, it is only proper that the RDO examine the matter and if necessary, conduct a physical inspection as also decide on the issue, after hearing the petitioner and the 6th respondent. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another [2015 WP(C) Nos.9145 & 10824 of 2015 3 (2) KHC 109 (SC)] considered the issue as to the categorisation of the land in the revenue records as also the sanction to be obtained under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 and the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court with respect to the grant of permission to fill up the lands said so in paragraph 18, which is extracted below:
Kerala High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - K V Chandran - Full Document

Dawn Mathews vs The Tahsildar on 18 November, 2014

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that WP(C).No.27952/2014-T. 2 they are entitled for a declaration from this Court in the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi and others v. Jalaja Dileep and another (2014 (1) KLT 161), to effectuate changes in the Basic Tax Register as the properties have been reclaimed long before the enactment of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008 (for short the "Act 28 of 2008"). It is further submitted, without prejudice to the petitioners' right as above, for seeking a declaration, the petitioners are entitled to convert or utilise the above land for any other purposes other than for cultivating food crops, as these properties are no longer fit for any cultivation.
Kerala High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - A M Mustaque - Full Document
1