{"id":138434,"date":"2010-10-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-10-11T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010"},"modified":"2016-07-24T12:32:40","modified_gmt":"2016-07-24T07:02:40","slug":"ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 24555 of 2010(T)\n\n\n1. M\/S.ATLAS MINES AND GRANITES (INDIA)LTD.\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR,\n\n3. TAHSILDAR, ADOOR TALUK, ADOOR,\n\n4. J.ANANTHAN, KATTUMADATHIL HOUSE,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL)\n\n                For Respondent  :SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC\n\n Dated :12\/10\/2010\n\n O R D E R\n                  ANTONY DOMINIC, J.\n                  -----------------------------\n                W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010\n                -----------------------------------\n        Dated this the 12th day of October 2010\n\n\n                      J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
     Challenge in this writ petition is against Exts.P9 and<\/p>\n
P15, orders passed by the Tahasildar and Revenue Divisional<\/p>\n
Officer, exercising their powers under the provisions of<\/p>\n
Transfer of Registry Rules, 1966.\n<\/p>\n
     2.   The 4th respondent holds Exts.R4(a) and R4(b),<\/p>\n
Mining Leases in respect of the property situated in Survey<\/p>\n
Nos.248\/2 and 248\/7 of Koodal village in Adoor Taluk.<\/p>\n
According to the petitioner, as per Ext.P2, an agreement<\/p>\n
between the Managing Director of the petitioner company<\/p>\n
and the 4th respondent, the parties agreed to incorporate a<\/p>\n
company under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956<\/p>\n
and the 4th respondent also agreed to transfer the quarries, in<\/p>\n
respect of which he had Exts.R4(a) and R4(b) Mining Leases,<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                              -: 2 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
against the receipt of consideration specified in the<\/p>\n
agreement.      It is stated that accordingly the petitioner<\/p>\n
company was incorporated and Ext.P1 dated 24.7.2008 is the<\/p>\n
Certificate of Incorporation.\n<\/p>\n
     3.    The case of the petitioner is that, as agreed<\/p>\n
between the parties, 4 Sale Deeds were executed by the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent in favour of the company and Ext.P5 dated<\/p>\n
4.4.2009 is one of the Sale Deeds. It is stated that based on<\/p>\n
the sale deeds, the properties were mutated into the name of<\/p>\n
the company and that accordingly, the company was paying<\/p>\n
basic tax in respect of the properties. It is also the contention<\/p>\n
of the petitioner that in pursuance to the sale deed executed,<\/p>\n
the 4th respondent submitted Ext.P4 application for transfer of<\/p>\n
quarrying lease pertaining to the property in Survey<\/p>\n
Nos.248\/2 and 248\/7.\n<\/p>\n
     4.    It is stated that subsequently on 14.8.2009, the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent filed O.S.No.243\/2009 before the Sub Court,<\/p>\n
Pathanamthitta, praying to set aside the sale deeds in favour<\/p>\n
of the company. A copy of the plaint is Ext.P7. The petitioner<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                              -: 3 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
company entered appearance and has filed written statement.<\/p>\n
While the suit was pending consideration of the Court, the 4th<\/p>\n
respondent submitted Ext.P8 application to the 3rd respondent<\/p>\n
requesting for cancellation of the mutation in respect of the<\/p>\n
property in Survey Nos.248\/2, 248\/7 and 293\/1\/1 in relation to<\/p>\n
which sale deeds were executed on 4.4.2009.<\/p>\n
     5.    Accordingly, the Tahasildar issued notice to the<\/p>\n
petitioner, considered the objections filed by the petitioner<\/p>\n
and issued Ext.P9 order cancelling the mutation in favour of<\/p>\n
the petitioner company. In this order two reasons are stated<\/p>\n
to justify the order cancelling the mutation. First is, that in<\/p>\n
terms of the provisions contained in the Mines and Mineral<\/p>\n
Concession Rules and also the terms of Exts.R4(a) and R4(b)<\/p>\n
Mining Leases, lease is not transferable and therefore the<\/p>\n
alienation of the property itself is illegal. It is also stated that<\/p>\n
in respect of the property in Survey Nos.248\/7 and 293\/1\/1<\/p>\n
proceedings under the Securitisation Act initiated by the<\/p>\n
State Bank of India were pending and that during the<\/p>\n
pendency of such proceedings, the property could not have<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                              -: 4 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
been transferred to the petitioner company. On these two<\/p>\n
grounds, the Tahasildar has ordered cancellation of the<\/p>\n
mutation effected in favour of the petitioner company.<\/p>\n
Aggrieved by Ext.P9 order, petitioner filed Ext.P10 revision to<\/p>\n
the Revenue Divisional Officer, who by Ext.P11 order stayed<\/p>\n
Ext.P9. Notice was issued to the parties and after hearing the<\/p>\n
objections of both parties, Ext.P15 order upholding Ext.P9<\/p>\n
was passed. It is in these circumstances, the writ petition is<\/p>\n
filed seeking to quash Exts.P9 and P15 orders.<\/p>\n
      6.   The contention raised by the learned counsel for<\/p>\n
the petitioner is that Exts.P9 and P15 are illegal and against<\/p>\n
the provisions of the Transfer of Registry Rules.     It is his<\/p>\n
contention that, even if the lease was not transferable in view<\/p>\n
of the restrictions imposed in the Mines and Mineral<\/p>\n
Concession Rules and Exts.R4(a) and R4(b), as a consequence<\/p>\n
the transfer of the property for consideration cannot be<\/p>\n
invalidated and at best, only the lease could have been got<\/p>\n
invalidated.   It is also his case that, Ext.P13 notice issued<\/p>\n
under Sec.8(1) of the Securitisation Rules, or the pendency of<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                              -: 5 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the proceedings under the Securitisation Act could not have<\/p>\n
been a reason to invalidate the alienation of the property but<\/p>\n
at best any transfer of such property would not have affected<\/p>\n
the interest of the financial institutions\/secured creditors.<\/p>\n
Therefore, according to counsel, the impugned orders are<\/p>\n
illegal. The learned counsel appearing for the 4th respondent<\/p>\n
attempted to sustain Exts.P9 and P15.           According to the<\/p>\n
learned counsel there is an absolute bar in transferring the<\/p>\n
property in respect of quarrying lease has been granted. It is<\/p>\n
stated that if such a property is transferred, such transfer is<\/p>\n
invalid and that if the transfer is invalid, the authorities under<\/p>\n
the Transfer of Registry Rules could not have ordered<\/p>\n
mutation and any mutation effected is liable for cancellation.<\/p>\n
It was     contended    that since     proceedings    under    the<\/p>\n
Securitisation Act were pending, the property could not have<\/p>\n
been transferred.      The learned counsel contended that for<\/p>\n
that reason also the mutation ordered in favour of the<\/p>\n
petitioner company was illegal and liable for cancellation.<\/p>\n
     7.    Although several controversies pending between<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                               -: 6 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
the parties are pending before different courts and various<\/p>\n
other authorities, having regard to the fact that the validity of<\/p>\n
Exts.P9 and P15 alone arises for consideration in this writ<\/p>\n
petition, it is not necessary for this Court to deal with any<\/p>\n
other factual issues. As already stated, in Ext.P9 only two<\/p>\n
reasons are stated. First is that in view of the prohibition of<\/p>\n
transfer of quarrying lease, the alienation of property itself<\/p>\n
was illegal. The Rule 29 of the Mines and Mineral Concession<\/p>\n
Rules, contain conditions of quarrying lease.           This rule<\/p>\n
incorporates restrictions on the right of lessee to transfer the<\/p>\n
quarrying lease.     Such provisions are also incorporated in<\/p>\n
Exts.R4(a) and R4(b) Mining Leases.              Consequence of<\/p>\n
violation of the conditions of Mining Lease are also<\/p>\n
incorporated in the Mining Leases.           A reading of these<\/p>\n
conditions would show that if a lessee violates any of those<\/p>\n
conditions of lease, that will result in the invalidation of the<\/p>\n
mining lease. However, transfer of Mining lease or violation<\/p>\n
of any of its conditions will not result in the invalidation of the<\/p>\n
alienation of the property or forfeiture of the title to the land<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                               -: 7 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
itself nor will the title holder be deprived of the ownership of<\/p>\n
his property.     Therefore, conclusion of the Tahasildar in<\/p>\n
Ext.P9 order that in view of the conditions of the Mining lease<\/p>\n
and the rules contained in Mines and Mineral Concession<\/p>\n
Rules, since transfer of lease was impermissible, alienation of<\/p>\n
the property is liable to be invalidated cannot be accepted.<\/p>\n
Therefore, that reason assigned in Ext.P9 for cancellation of<\/p>\n
mutation is unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
      8.   The    other   reason     stated in  Ext.P9 is that<\/p>\n
proceedings under the provisions of Securitisation Act was<\/p>\n
pending at the time of alienation of the property. As stated in<\/p>\n
Ext.P13 dated 10.7.2010, the learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner contended that the notice under Sec.13(4) was<\/p>\n
published only in December, 2009 whereas the property in<\/p>\n
question was transferred in April 2009. Therefore, at the time<\/p>\n
of its alienation, petitioner had no notice of the pendency of<\/p>\n
the proceedings. Apart from that, at best, consequence of<\/p>\n
such transfer can be that the transfer will not in any manner<\/p>\n
will affect the interest of the secured creditor. However, this<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                              -: 8 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
reason cannot be a ground for the transferor to avoid the<\/p>\n
consequences of transfer.       Therefore, the second reason<\/p>\n
stated in Ext.P9 is also unsustainable.\n<\/p>\n
      9.   It is the settled position of law that mutation will<\/p>\n
not by itself create any interest in the property nor will<\/p>\n
mutation result in any one being deprived of the title to the<\/p>\n
property which he otherwise has. Mutation is effected only<\/p>\n
for fiscal purposes. Therefore the fact that mutation has been<\/p>\n
effected in favour of the company will not by itself, be to the<\/p>\n
prejudice of any one’s legal rights over the property in<\/p>\n
question.\n<\/p>\n
      10. In so far as Ext.P15 order is concerned, this<\/p>\n
appellate order does not deal with any of the issues raised,<\/p>\n
but on the other hand, the RDO merely endorsed the view<\/p>\n
taken by the original authority. Therefore basically this is a<\/p>\n
dependent order and if Ext.P9 is invalidated, Ext.P15 also will<\/p>\n
stand invalidated.\n<\/p>\n
           Therefore I quash Exts.P9 and P15.       It is made<\/p>\n
clear that the findings in this judgment are only       for the<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) No.24555 of 2010<\/p>\n
                               -: 9 :-<\/span><\/p>\n
limited purpose of disposal of this writ petition and any court<\/p>\n
or other authority which are seized of the other disputes<\/p>\n
between the parties shall decide those matters untrammelled<\/p>\n
by the findings herein .\n<\/p>\n
           Writ petition is disposed of as above.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
                                ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE.\n<\/p>\n
\nJvt<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 24555 of 2010(T) 1. M\/S.ATLAS MINES AND GRANITES (INDIA)LTD. … Petitioner Vs 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE … Respondent 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR, 3. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-138434","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nM\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1522,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010","datePublished":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010"},"wordCount":1522,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010","name":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites ... vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-10-11T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-24T07:02:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-atlas-mines-and-granites-vs-state-of-kerala-represented-by-the-on-12-october-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S.Atlas Mines And Granites … vs State Of Kerala Represented By The on 12 October, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138434","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=138434"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/138434\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=138434"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=138434"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=138434"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}