High Court Kerala High Court

P.B.Jeevan Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 18 November, 2008

Kerala High Court
P.B.Jeevan Kumar vs State Of Kerala on 18 November, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 31369 of 2008(H)


1. P.B.JEEVAN KUMAR, S/O.P.V.BHANU PANICKER
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-691 001.

3. THE TAHSILDAR, PATHANAPURAM TALUK,

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PUNALUR VILLAGE,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :18/11/2008

 O R D E R
                            V.GIRI,J.
                      -------------------------
                 W.P ( C) No.31369 of 2008
                     --------------------------
            Dated this the 18th November, 2008

                       J U D G M E N T

Petitioner claims to be an owner in possession of 43

cents of land comprised in Sy. Nos.486/7/13, 486/7/14,

486/7/15. 486/7/16 and 486/7/17 of Punalur village

included in thandaper account of 14145. Petitioner

wants to avail a loan from the Repco Bank and for this

purpose he wanted a possession certificate. Exhibit-P2

application was considered by the village officer and

rejected as per Exhibit-P3 stating that the details of the

property was furnished before the Judicial First Class

Magistrate Court-I, Changanassery in C.C No.532/2004.

Petitioner was arrayed as accused in the said case.

Though he was originally convicted, petitioner has

preferred an appeal and in the meanwhile, sentence has

been suspended, as evidenced by Exhibit-P5.

According to the petitioner, though the properties

were originally attached, there is no subsisting

W.P ( C) No.31369 of 2008
2

attachment. In my view, this is a matter to be looked into

by the Tahasildar. At any rate, the possession certificate is

required only for proving possession of the property or for

any other specific purposes.

Without going into the merits of the claim made by

the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of directing the

3rd respondent to consider Exhibit-P9 application filed by

the petitioner (produced along with I.A No.14395/2008)

and take appropriate decision thereon, within six weeks

from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

(V.GIRI,JUDGE)
ma

W.P ( C) No.31369 of 2008
3

W.P ( C) No.31369 of 2008
4