Peter v. Village Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/24TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 37952 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------- PETITIONER :

------------------ PETER, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. M.J.MATHEW, MOONGEMPILLY, THAIKKATTUKARA, ALUVA.

BY ADVS.SRI.E.D.GEORGE SMT.K.HASEENA RESPONDENTS :

----------------------

1. VILLAGE OFFICER THENKURUSSI, ALATHUR TALUK-678541.

2. ADDITIONAL THAHSILDAR ALATHUR, PALAKKAD-678541.

R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BIJU MEENATTOOR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

bp

WP(C).No. 37952 of 2015 (T) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2410/2007 OF KUZHALMANNAM SUB REGISTRY, DTD. 30-10-2007.

EXHIBIT P2:- TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 8-5-2012. EXHIBIT P3:- TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE DATED 3-2-2014. EXHIBIT P4:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 2-4-2014 SENT BY THE SECRETARY VILAYACHATHANNUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER.

EXHIBIT P5:- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 18-8-2015 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICER FOR EFFECTING MUTATION.

EXHIBIT P6:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10-10-2015 RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE TALUK OFFICER, FOR A PERSONAL HEARING.

EXHIBIT P7:- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3-11-2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL.

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

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

================== W.P.(C).No. 37952 of 2015 ================== Dated this the 15th day of December, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner approached the Additional Tahsildar, Alathur for effecting transfer of registry. This has been rejected stating that there is a dispute in respect of the property. 2.

This Court is of the view that merely because of existence of any dispute cannot be a reason to deny the transfer of registry. Therefore after hearing the petitioner and the disputant, appropriate decision shall be taken by the Additional Tahsildar. Needless to say that the merits of the claim of both parties have to be verified. In the event if the Tahsildar is of the view that the disputed question of title cannot be decided by him, he shall relegate the parties to civil court. Needful shall be done within three months from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is disposed of, as above.

Sd/- sab A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE