IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 35366 of 2009(M) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- SASEENDRAN. P., S/O.GOPALAPILLAI, PUTHEN PARAMBIL HOUSE, LOKAMALLESWARAM (PO), KODUNGALLUR, TRICHUR. BY ADV. MR.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, CHEVAYOOR, KOZHIKODE. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.35366 of 2009-F - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is the owner of about 15.70 cents of land in RS No.21/2 in Parayancherry desom, Kottooly Village of Kozhikode Taluk as per document No.5888/2004 dated 13.12.2004 of Sub Registrar's Office, Chevayoor. Ext.P1 is the copy of the said document. Ext.P2 is the copy of the possession certificate issued by the concerned Village Officer and Ext.P3 shows that basic tax has been paid on 4.12.2008. 2. It appears that there were certain proceedings initiated by third parties and a writ petition, viz. O.P. No.39194/2002 was also pending before this Court. The Sub Registrar therefore issued Ext.P4 notice to the petitioner as to why the details were suppressed. The petitioner submits that he was not a party in the said writ petition. There was a civil suit, viz. O.S. No.32/02 before the Sub Court, Kozhikode filed by one Smt. A.P. Meera which was a money suit seeking for realisation of an amount of Rs.3,43,272/32 from one Shri R. Manohar from whom the predecessor in interest of the petitioner purchased the property in question. It is the case of the petitioner that the said suit was dismissed for default subsequently. wpc 35366/2009 2 Ext.P5 is the copy of the lawyer notice sent as a reply to Ext.P4. 3. Presently, the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the second respondent in not removing the endorsement in respect of the petitioner's property despite the closure of the various cases, as evidenced by Exts.P7 and P8. Ext.P9 is the copy of the encumbrance certificate for the period from 1.1.1995 to 25.6.2007 and Ext.P10 is the copy of the encumbrance certificate for the period from 1.1.2004 to 2.4.2009. 4. The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to remove the endorsement showing encumbrance in the records relating to the properties covered by Ext.P1 in the light of Exts.P7 and P8 judgments. 5. Learned Govt. Pleader on instructions, submitted that the usual practice is to take such action only after receipt of the copies of the judgments from the concerned court. Herein, it is evident that the petitioner has already produced Exts.P7 and P8 before the second respondent. If the petitioner makes available the certified copies of the said judgments, the second respondent will see that appropriate steps are taken to remove the objectionable endorsements in the records relating to the petitioner's property, expeditiously. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/