IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 6790 of 2010(W)
1. SHEELA, W/O.ANTONY FELIX,
... Petitioner
2. USHA, W/O.ALPHY JOSEPH,
3. SHEEBA RAYAN, W/O.DOMINIC RAYAN,
Vs
1. TAHSILDAR,
... Respondent
2. VILLAGE OFFICER,
For Petitioner :SRI.T.V.GEORGE
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :29/11/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No. 6790 of 2010 W
```````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners are sisters. According to them, the first
petitioner acquired 85 cents of land by sale deed No.5/1977 of
Sub Registry Office, Ernakulam and that the second petitioner
acquired 2 acres of land by sale deed No.4/1977 of SRO,
Ernakulam. Counsel for the petitioners submits that out of the
2 acres acquired by the second petitioner, 1 acre was sold to
the third petitioner by sale deed Nos.4201/96 and 4424/96 of
SRO, Ernakulam.
2. It is stated that, subsequently, they obtained
Exts.P2 to P4 purchase certificates in respect of the aforesaid
properties. Later, they made applications for mutation of the
properties. Their complaint in this writ petition is that orders
have not been passed by the respondents on the applications
made by them.
3. Reason stated by the first respondent in the
W.P.(C) No.6790/10
: 2 :
counter affidavit filed is that a portion of the property, in
respect of which application has been made, is the subject
matter of RFA.No.710/2009, which is stated to be pending
before this Court. However, learned counsel for the
petitioners reiterated before me that the subject matter of the
RFA is an adjacent property and that the aforesaid properties
are not involved in any litigation.
4. If as stated by the petitioners, there is no dispute
about the property, in respect of which applications have been
made, there is no reason why orders shall not be passed by
the respondents on the applications made by them under the
Transfer of Registry Rules.
5. Therefore, taking note of the submissions made by
the counsel for the petitioners as noticed above, this writ
petition will stand disposed of, directing the respondents to
pass orders on the applications made by the petitioners,
under the Transfer of Registry Rules, provided the lands
which are the subject matter of the applications are not
W.P.(C) No.6790/10
: 3 :
involved in the RFA noticed above.
Orders shall be passed, at any rate, within six weeks
from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
aks
// True Copy //
P.A. To Judge