Rugmini P.Adisyara vs The Special Tahsildar on 27 May, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 15689 of 2008(P)


1. RUGMINI P.ADISYARA, WIFE OF PRABHAKARAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :27/05/2008

 O R D E R
                             S.SIRI JAGAN, J
                      = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                       W.P.(C).No. 15689 OF 2008
                         = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                    Dated this the 27th day of May, 2008.

                             J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is aggrieved by notice issued to her son for

eviction from properties belonging to the petitioner. Ext.P7 is the

order issued to the petitioner’s son in this regard. The contention

of the petitioner is that since the notice has been served on the

petitioner’s son, the right of appeal, which is available to the

petitioner, who is the owner of the property, has been effectively

curtailed. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:

1. To call for the records leading to Ext.P7 order
and quash the same by the issuance of a writ of
certiorari or any other writ, direction or order.

2. To declare that the 5 cents of land in survey
No. 414 of Kodungallur Taluk is in the exclusive
possession and enjoyment of the petitioner under ext.P1
document, is not liable to be interfered with in any
manner.

2. I have heard the Government Pleader and the

standing counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

3. If the petitioner is actually the owner of the property I

am of opinion that simply because the order has been served on

W.P.(C).No. 15689 OF 2008 2

her son, the petitioner cannot be prevented from filing an appeal

against that order. Therefore I direct that if the petitioner files

an appeal against Ext.P7 order, notwithstanding that the same is

addressed to the petitioner’s son, the appellate authority shall

entertain the same and pass appropriate orders on the same. In

order to enable the petitioner to seek his remedy by way of

appeal as directed above, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P7

shall be kept in abeyance for two weeks.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

bkn/-