IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2008 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 8908 of 2008(I) ------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. AUGUSTIN KURIAN, S/O. C.K.MATHEW, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 2. PETER KURIAN, S/O.C.M.KURIAN, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 3. CELESTIAN GEORGE, S/O.C.K.MATHEW, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 4. MARTIN C.MATHEW, S/O. C.K.MATHEW, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 5. SHIJU JOSEPH, S/O. C.K. JOSEPH, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 6. VIJU JOSEPH, S/O. C.K.JOSEPH, CHAKKALAKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 7. M.P. FRANCIS, S/O.M.O. PAUL, MANPURAYKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 8. M.P. SEBASTIAN, S/O. M.O. PAUL, MANPURAYKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 9. M.P. JAMES, S/O. M.O. PAUL, MANPURAYKAL HOUSE, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. WPC 8908/08 10. K.K. THANKAM, W/O. P.K. PURUSHAN, VETTUVELIL, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O., KAKKANAD. 11. A.D. JERSON, S/O.A.M.DEVASSY, ASHARIPARAMBIL, THUTHIYOORKARA, CEZE P.O.,KAKKANAD BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VAZHAKALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,REVENUE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 8908 OF 2008 I ==================== Dated this the 17th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T Ext.P8 order is under challenge. 2. By Ext.P8, an application made by the petitioners for issue of patta has been rejected. Both on facts and on account of delay, I am not inclined to interfere with Ext.P5. Ext.P5 has been issued as early as on 21/2/2005 and the challenge now raised after three years, in my view is highly belated. 3. The case of the petitioners that they are in possession of the land is also belied by the contents in Ext.P2, in which, the respondent has entered a factual finding that the land is not in their possession. For these reasons, I do not find any reason to interfere with Ext.P8. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp