High Court of Kerala
Case Law Search
K.P.SANKARANKUTTY, S/O.KUNJUNNI GUPTAN v. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARIMPA VILLAGE - WP(C) No. 3110 of 2007(T)  RD-KL 13256 (17 July 2007)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMWP(C) No. 3110 of 2007(T)
1. K.P.SANKARANKUTTY, S/O.KUNJUNNI GUPTAN,
2. K.P.BALAKRISHNAN, DO. DO.
3. K.P.NARAYANAN, DO. DO.
4. K.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, DO. DO.
1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARIMPA VILLAGE,
2. SMT.AMMALUKUTTY AMMA,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.EASWARAN
For Respondent :SRI.TOM K.THOMAS
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
O R D E R
S. SIRI JAGAN, J.W.P.(C)NO.3110 OF 2007
DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF JULY, 2007
The petitioners complain that the 1st respondent is refusing to issue possession certificate and tax receipt in respect of the property which as per the revenue records stands in the name of the petitioners and the petitioners are in possession of the same. By Exts.P4 and P5, the petitioners have been informed that this is because a suit is pending as O.S.No.113/06 and also a crime is registered as Crime No.862/06 of Mannarkkad Police Station in respect of the property. The petitioners therefore, seek the following reliefs.
"a) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writs, directions or orders calling for the records leading upto Exhibit P5 and quash Exhibits P4 and P5 proceedings of the 1st respondent;
b) to issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writs, directions or orders compelling the 1st respondent to accept the tax in respect of the properties of the petitioners and also issue possession certificate to the petitioners for the year 2007 as evident from Ext.P3.
c) to grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the circumstances of the case". W.P.(c)No3110/07 2
2. I have heard the learned Government pleader also. The learned Government pleader reiterates the contentions as found in Exts.P4 and P5 and supports the same. However, the learned Government pleader does not deny the fact that the property in question stands in the name of the petitioners as per the revenue records. The pendency of a suit or criminal proceedings cannot be a ground for refusal to issue possession certificate or to receive tax in respect of the property. The suit is between the petitioners and the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent has appeared through counsel. The 2nd respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The 2nd respondent would contend that because of the suit and private complaint filed by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner is not entitled to possession certificate and tax receipt. However, the 2nd respondent could not bring to my attention any provision of law which prohibits issue of possession certificate and receiving of tax in respect of the property, with respect to which there is a suit or criminal case pending.
3. In the above circumstances, I direct the 1st respondent to issue possession certificate and tax receipt on payment of tax to the petitioner notwithstanding Exts.P4 and P5 or pendency of the suit and criminal case as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, W.P.(c)No3110/07 3 within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above.
S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGEAcd W.P.(c)No3110/07 4
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.