IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 15074 of 2009(D) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. GEORGE AMBOOKEN, AMBOOKEN HOUSE, LOKAMALLESWARAM, KODUNGALLUR. 2. LYZA GEORGE, AMBOOKEN HOUSE, LOKAMALLESWARAM, KODUNGALLUR. BY ADVS. MR.V.V.ASOKAN, MR.P.P.RAMACHANDRAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR & COMPETENT AUTHORITY, ACQUISITION FOR NATIONAL HIGHWAY, KODUNGALLUR BYEPASS, KODUNGALLUR. 2. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, REGIONAL OFFICE, TRICHUR. R2 BY ADV. MR. THOMAS ANTONY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.15074 of 2009-D = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT 1.Adv.Sri.Thomas Antony appears for the second respondent. Notice to the first respondent is dispensed with preserving his right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. 2.According to the petitioners, they bought an item of property from certain persons. On the strength of those assignment deeds, the petitioners sought for payment of compensation. The registered document has been produced. The respondents are stated to be insisting on the production of the heirship certificate in relation to the predecessor-in-interest of the vendor. That insistence is too far-fetched, in the common course of things. There appears to be no rival claimant. Even if there be, it also needs to be WP(C)15074/09 -: 2 :- noticed that a heirship certificate can be obtained and produced only by the person who is entitled to be issued such a heirship certificate. The petitioners are only assignees and not heirs of the predecessor of the transferor. Even if the Tahsildar has any reason to doubt the survival of title, it is for that officer to obtain appropriate information from the competent authority who may deal with the question of heirship and certify it. But, even that laborious task need not be taken in this case because, there is evidently no challenge to the title of the petitioners and the respondents would stand discharged of their obligations on payment of amounts due in terms of the title proved by the petitioners. If there is any further dispute that may be raised by a third party, that would be a matter for the petitioners to take care of and not the respondents. For the aforesaid reasons, the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners WP(C)15074/09 -: 3 :- on the basis of the documents furnished by them and in the light of what is stated above. Let the needful be done at the earliest. The writ petition is ordered accordingly leaving open all other issues as to the claim to title. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/050609