IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 10747 of 2008(D)
1. K.T.JOSEPH, AGED 57 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM,
... Respondent
2. THE TAHSILDAR, CHANGANASSERY,
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
4. THOMAS, S/O.DEVASSIA, KANIKARA HOUSE,
5. THRESSIAMMA, W/O.THOMAS,
6. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :31/03/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
===============
W.P.(C) NO. 10747 OF 2008 D
====================
Dated this the 31st day of March, 2008
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition discloses the story of an ongoing litigation between
the petitioner on one side and the respondents 4 and 5, who are none
other than his parents, on the other side. The dispute concerns the
property covered by Ext.P1 gift deed executed by his aforesaid parents in
favour of the petitioner, which is stated to have been revoked at a later
point of time. This controversy is now pending consideration of the
Munsiff’s Court, Changanacherry in OS Nos.201/07 and 333/07 filed by
both parties.
2. The immediate cause for filing this writ petition is the
information that the petitioner got that the 2nd respondent has effected
mutation of the property in favour of the parents following Ext.P8 notice
that was issued. It is stated that the petitioner has applied for a copy of
the said order by submitting Ext.P10 and even that has not been issued to
him. In this background writ petition is filed praying for a direction not to
take further action on the mutation that is stated to have been effected.
3. Since the dispute between the parties is essentially a civil
WPC 10747/08
:2 :
dispute and that the competent Civil Court has seized of the same, I am
not inclined to pass the order as sought for. However, that does not mean
that the petitioner should not be issued a copy of the order if any passed
following Ext.P8 notice on the application made by the respondents 4 and
5 for effecting mutation in their name.
4. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing that the
2nd respondent shall issue the petitioner a copy of the order stated to have
been passed following Ext.P8.
This the respondents shall do within ten days of production of a
copy of this judgment.
ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.
Rp