IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 5TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 14TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22808 of 2011(A) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- K.M.ABDUL KAREEM, S/O.LATE MUHAMMED, KAKKAT HOUSE, EDAVANAKKAD VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 502. BY ADVS. SRI.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN SRI.V.K.MEETHIANKUNJU SMT.BHAMA G. NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 030. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAVANAKKAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 502. 4. THE SUB-REGISTRAR, KUZHUPILLY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 501. 5. THE GOSHREE ISLANDS DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM-682 011, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 22808/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.177/1950 OF KUZHUPPILLY SUB-REGISTRY. P1(a):COPY OF THE SAID PARTITION DEED NO.177/1950 OF KUZHUPILLY SUB-REGISTRY. P2: COPY OF THE DRAFT SALE DEED DATED NIL. P3: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.C4/55417/2007 DATED 08/10/2007. P4: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26/09/2009 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 28/09/10 IN WPC. NO.20524/2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 22808 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is the owner of about 60 cents of land in Sy.Nos.184/3 and 184/5 of Edavanakkad Village. It is stated that he has entered into an agreement for sale of the said property. However, he says that the 4th respondent will not register the sale deed for the reason that the property has been frozen for acquisition as per Ext.P3 letter of the 2nd respondent. It is stated that in similar cases, judgments have been rendered by this court directing registration of sale deeds. One of the judgments relied on has been produced as Ext.P5. 2. Heard the learned Government Pleader also. The facts of the case show that facts of case referred to in Ext.P5 judgment is similar to one raised by the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner is entitled to similar reliefs. W.P.(C) No. 22808 OF 2011 :2 : In that view of the matter this writ petition is also disposed of directing that, if the petitioner produces the sale deed concerning the property mentioned above, the 4th respondent shall register the document provided the document is otherwise valid in all other respects. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-