P.Prasad v. Village Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 35954 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :
--------------------- P. PRASAD S/O.P.G.DIVAKARAN, AGED 56 YEARS POCHAPPALLIL HOUSE, ULLANNOOR MURI KULANADA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA.
REP. BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER P.SUSEELAN, AGED 59, S/O.P.G.DIVAKARAN, POCHAPPALLIL HOUSE ULLANNOOR MURI, KULANADA VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA.
BY ADV. SRI.S.MUHAMMED HANEEF RESPONDENT(S) :
----------------------------
1. VILLAGE OFFICER KULANADA VILLAGE, VILLAGE OFFICE, KULANADA PATHANAMTHITTA-689 503.
2. TAHASILDHAR TALUK OFFICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA-689 641.
3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR PATHANAMTHITTA-689 645.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn ...2/-
WP(C).No. 35954 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
------------------------------------- EXT. P1A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2870/2009 OF S.R.O., PANDALAM DT. 19.12.2009 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY ONE RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI.
EXT. P2A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2636/2010 OF S.R.O, PANDALAM DT. 04.10.2010 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER BY ONE K.A.VINODKUMAR.
EXT. P3A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE PERIOD 01.01.1993 TO 4.11.2009 IN RESPECT OF EXT.P1. EXT. P4A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT FOR THE PERIOD 01.01.1993 TO 4.11.2009 IN RESPECT OF EXT.P2. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL ---------------------------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Mn
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
===================== W.P(C)No.35954 of 2015 ========================== Dated this the 14th day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
Petitioner approaches this Court on account of refusal to effect Transfer of Registry in respect of the property covered by Exts.P1 and P2.
2. It appears that, on account of attachment, the revenue officials refused to effect Transfer of Registry.
3. This Court is of the view, notwithstanding any attachment effected in the property, Transfer of Registry shall be effected based on Exts.P1 and P2 in accordance with law. Needful shall be done within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE vdv/15/12/15