IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 22299 of 2009(F) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- JAISON, S/O. ABRAHAM, AGED 38 YEARS, KAKKATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, VALARA P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.N.M.VARGHESE, SRI.ROY THOMAS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUB REGISTRAR, RAJAKUMARI, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, RAJAKUMARI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.A. ASIF THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.22299/2009 F APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.1274/2001 DTD. 22/05/2001 EXECUTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT SUB REGISTRAR, IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. P2: COPY OF PATTA NO.LA.52/1978 DTD. 4/06/1978 ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF SMT. MARIAMMAL, W/O. VETHANYAKAM. P3: COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.824589 DTD. 28/06/2006 IN THANDAPPER NO.1069 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER CHINNAKANAL IN THE NAME OF SMT. MARIAMMAL. P4: COPY OF CERTIFICATE OF ENCUMBRANCE NO.2915/2009 DTD.19/06/2009 CONCERNING THE PROPERTY, ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF AGREEMENT TO SELL THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER EXECUTED BY THE POWER HOLDER OF THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF JOHN, S/O.VARKEY, CHUNDANKUZHIYIL HOUSE, CHINNAKANAL, DTD. 19/06/2009. P6: COPY OF SALE DEED DTD. 9/07/2010. P7: COPY OF OBJECTION DTD. 9/07/2010. P8: COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.33883819 DTD. 7/07/2010. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.22299 OF 2009(F) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T What lead the petitioner to file this writ petition is the refusal to register the original of Ext.P6 sale deed executed by the petitioner in respect of the property mentioned therein. According to the petitioner, the reason stated is that the petitioner had not produced no Objection Certificate from the revenue official. 2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has produced a copy of the judgment of the Division Bench in W.A. No.2080/2009, taking the view that the 2nd respondent cannot insist on the NOC for registration of documents. A reading of the judgment also shows that liberty has been given to the revenue officials to proceed against the property sought to be transferred, in the event it is found that the land belongs to the Government or if the Patta obtained is found bogus. 3. Now that the issue is covered in favour of the petitioner by the above judgment, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 2nd respondent shall register the original of Ext.P6 sale deed, if it is presented for registration, without insisting for a Non WPC.No.22299 /09 :2 : Objection certificate and with liberty to the respondents to proceed against the property in the contingencies indicated in the judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/