High Court Kerala High Court

Kochalan vs State Of Kerala on 1 February, 2011

Kerala High Court
Kochalan vs State Of Kerala on 1 February, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 3166 of 2011(U)


1. KOCHALAN, S/O.KANNAN, AGED 73 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. V.V.ABDUL ASEES, S/O.MUHAMMED, AGED 52

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF

3. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE,

4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.A.ABDUL JABBAR

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :01/02/2011

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                         -------------------------
                   W.P (C) No. 3166 of 2011
                        --------------------------
               Dated this the 1st February, 2011

                           J U D G M E N T

First petitioner owns properties in Sy. Nos.404/22

and 404/23 of Aroor village. By Ext.P1 notification, fair

value in respect of the property was fixed at the rate of

`8,50,000/- per Are. On an application made by the 1st

petitioner, by Ext.P4, the Additional District Magistrate

revised the fair value of the land and refixed the same at

`85000 per Are. While so, the first petitioner executed

Ext.P5 document in favour of the 2nd petitioner.

However, since the fair value revised by Ext.P4 has not

been notified so far, the 3rd respondent refused to

register Ext.P5 document. It is complaining of the above,

the writ petition is filed.

2. Going by the provisions of Section 28 A of the

Kerala Stamp Act, unless the fair value is notified the

same cannot be effective. Admittedly, fair value fixed as

per Ext.P4 has not been notified so far.

3. If that be so, this Court cannot find fault with

the 3rd respondent for refusing to register Ext.P5. At this

W.P (C) No. 3166 of 2011
2

stage, what is required is that, the Additional District

Magistrate who has issued Ext.P4, should ensure that the

fair value fixed in Ext.P4 is expeditiously notified. This the

4th respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this

judgment. Once notification is published, it will be open to

the petitioner to present the original of Ext.P5 for

registration before the 3rd respondent who shall deal with

the Ext.P5 document in accordance with law.

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
ma

/True copy/
P.A to Judge