IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2009 / 16TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 28697 of 2003(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMT. VASANTHI, W/O. SHESAPPA BOLCHAPPADA, KUNDERI, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SPECIAL TAHASILDAR (L.A), KASARAGOD. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KASARAGOD AT KANHANGAD. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, MUSIUM JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PARAMESWA BHAT, S/O. SANKARANARAYANA BHAT, KUNDERI, PAIVALIKE VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MATHEW VADAKEL, FOR R1-R3 SRI.V.V.ASOKAN FOR R4 SMT.S.AMINA FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT ORDER IN LA. 36/73/PAIVALIKE PASSED IN FAVOUR OF SHANKARA NARAYANA BHAT DATED 4.5.1974 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN AA 12/2000 FILED BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 5.4.2000 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION TO CONDONE DELAY IN FILING AA 12/2000 FILED BEFORE R2 DATED 5.4.2000 EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN A.A.12/2000 PASSED BY R2 DATED 30.7.2001 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BEFORE R3 DATED 1.8.2003 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN K.DIS. LR (J2) 24709/2002 PASSED BY R3 DATED 1.8.2003 4TH RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 73 OR 2001 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, KASARAGODE. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO.28697 OF 2003 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner challenged the assignment of land to the fourth respondent's father 25 years after assignment through an appeal which was dismissed. Even though a revision was filed against the appellate order, the same was also dismissed against which this W.P.C. is filed. It is seen that assignment of 13 cents of land was made to the father of the fourth respondent 25 years back. I do not find any justification to interfere with the assignment to the father of the fourth respondent. W.P.C. is therefore devoid of any merit and is dismissed. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge kk 2