IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2011 / 5TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20505 of 2011(K) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- JISHNU V.DEV,S/O.E.N.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI,AGED 3O,EDAMANA ILLAM, EDANADU P.O, PALA VIA,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT PIN 686 574. BY ADV. SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, TALAPPILLY TALUK, WADAKKANCHERRY P.O, THRISSUR DISTRICT 686 582. 2. VILLAGE OFFICER, KANIPAYYOOR VILLAGE KANIPAYYOOR P.O THRISSUR DISTRICT 680 517. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 20505/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.674/2009 DATED 14/03/2009. P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. NO.6527/2009 DATED 06/03/96. P3: COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR TRANSFER OF REGISTRY AND TO REMIT BASIC TAX DATED 20/08/2010 SUBMITTED TO 1ST RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN RP NO.344/2009 DATED 25/03/2009 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A. NO.862/10 DATED 25/05/2010 PASSED BY MUNSIFF COURT, WADAKKANCHERY. P6: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.5027/2011 DATED 17/02/2011 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P7: COPY OF THE ORDER IN G4-3658/2011 DATED 17/03/2011 PASSED BY THE ADDL. THAHAZHILDAR. P8: COPY OF THE REPLY CUM REQUEST DATED 30/03/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P9: COPY OF THE ORDER IN G4-3658/2011 DATED 26/05/2011 PASSED BY THE ADDL. THAHAZILDAR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 20505 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF JULY, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's grievance is against Exts.P9 and P7. These are orders passed by the 1st respondent rejecting the petitioner's application for mutation of a property on the ground that a suit with title dispute is now pending before the civil court. 2. When the civil dispute is pending, statutory authority has rightly declined the petitioner's application to effect mutation. In such a situation, this Court cannot find fault with such an order. 3. If at all the petitioner wants, it is up to him to move the civil Court and obtain order clarifying that the pendency of the suit will not stand in the way of consideration of the application. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE AMG True copy P.A to Judge