IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31129 of 2009(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. ADIYATTIL YAHOO, S/O.KUNJAHAMMED, P.O.PALLAR, VAIRAMKODE, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SAIDALAVI HAJI, S/O.KUNHIMOHAMMED, AYAPPALLI THAZHATHETHIL HOUSE, P.O.KANMANAM, THEKKUMURI, VALAVANNOOR, TIRUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. TAHSILDAR, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, TIRUR. 3. RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, S/O.NARAYANA PILLAI, "KARTHIKA", POONTHANAM NAGAR, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM. 4. SUNEEL G., ROLL NO.K/451/90 ADVOCATE AND NOTARY, MANJERI. 5. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1, R2, R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.V.MANU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.31129 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT In a today motion matter, that too filed after mentioning to the Court, what ultimately turns out is that the petitioners want relief on the allegation that Ext.P10 is a fabricated document. They, accordingly, seek a direction that respondents 1 and 2 shall be restrained from collecting land tax from the third respondent in relation to certain properties referred to in the relief portion in this writ petition. They request for the issuance of a direction to conduct an enquiry against the 4th respondent, a notary, on the allegation that the said person has certified certain documents. Primarily, the issue raised is in relation to a document which is criticized as a fabricated one. Beyond that is the fact that the Land Tax Act and the Transfer of Registry Rules provide abundant room for litigations of this nature, apart from the WPC.31129/09. Page numbers jurisdiction of the civil court to entertain any suit of a civil nature. 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. It is not for this Court to entertain this writ petition and issue an order of restraint, interfering with the executive function of the State in collecting land tax. Hence, preserving all contentions of the petitioners on merits, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.3/11.