IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2010 / 12TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 31405 of 2009(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ADIYATTIL YAHOO, S/O. KUNJAHAMMED, P.O. PALLAR, VAIRAMKODE, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SAIDALAVI HAJI, S/O. KUNHIMOHAMMED, AYYAPPALLI, THAZHATHETHIL HOUSE, P.O. KANMANAM, THEKKUMURI, VALAVANNOOR, TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV.MR.JAMSHEED HAFIZ. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. TAHSILDAR , TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O. NARAYANA PILLAI, KARTHIKA, POONTHANAM NAGAR, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1, R2 & R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. M.A. ASIF, R3 BY ADV. MR.BABU S. NAIR. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/02/2010,ALONG WITH W.P.(C). NO. 31486 OF 2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.31405/2009-U: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 07/03/2009 BY THE R.1. WITH SKETCH. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DTD. 15/03/2008. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DTD. 12/03/1956. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DTD. 20/02/1991. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DTD. 20/12/1985. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE FABRICATED PARTITION DEED OF THE YEAR 1917. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE DETAILED STATEMENT DTD. 28/08/2009. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE DETAILED STATEMENT DTD. 27/10/2009. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 03/10/2009. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) Nos.31405/2009-U & 31486/2009-E - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of February, 2010. JUDGMENT These two writ petitions concern a common dispute between the petitioners and therefore they are disposed of by a common judgment. 2. In W.P.(C) No.31405/2009 the challenge is against Ext.P9 order passed by the Tahsidlar, Tirur wherein a direction was issued allowing transfer of registry in favour of the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.31486/2009. In the said writ petition, the petitioner seeks for a direction to implement the very same order which is produced as Ext.P1 therein. Various contentions have been raised by the parties herein. The property involved is having an extent of 75 cents comprised in R.S. No.186/5 B2 of Kurumbathoor village. The petitioners in W.P.(C) No.31405/2009 claim that they are the owners of the property comprised in R.S. No.186/5 A and 186/5 B2 of the same village. The extent shown is 2.5 cents and 41.3 cents respectively. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondent in W.P. (C) No.31405/2009 who is the petitioner in the other writ petition, submitted that the remedy, if any, of the petitioners in W.P.(C) wpc 31405 & 31486/2009 2 No.31405/2009 is to approach the civil court, especially in the light of the judgment in W.P.(C) No.31129/2009 wherein the very same petitioners were the writ petitioners. It is therefore submitted that at this stage this Court need not go into the disputed questions between the parties. 4. In W.P.(C) No.31129/2009 the petitioners sought for a direction to respondents 1 and 2, viz. the Tahsidlar, Tirur and the Village Officer, Tirur restraining them from collecting land tax from the third respondent therein (petitioner in W.P.(C) No.31486/2009). Therein, this Court was of the view that the Land Tax Act and the Transfer of Registry Rules provide abundant room for litigations of this nature apart from the jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain any suit of a civil nature. This Court further observed that “the petitioners, if aggrieved about any proposal to collect land tax, have to raise objection before the competent authority and carry it, if necessary, to further statutory authorities for proper adjudication.” 5. In the above view of the matter, the remedy of the petitioners in W.P.(C) No.31405/2009 is to approach the civil court. Learned counsel for the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.31482/2009 submitted that it may be made clear that if any remittance of land tax is made by the parties, it will be subject to the outcome of the civil suit. wpc 31405 & 31486/2009 3 6. Therefore, it is made clear that the receipt of land tax from any of the parties herein, will be subject to the decision/orders in any interlocutory applications, which may be filed in the suit or in its absence, subject to the final outcome of the civil suit. The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/