IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 WP(C).No. 26682 of 2011(I) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- VELUMEENAKSHY, AGED 83 YEARS,CHARUVILA KIZHAKKAKTHIL, CHATHANNOOR, THAZHAM VADAKKECHERRY, MEENADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM, THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SUDARSANAN,AGED 55 YEARS, S/O.JANARDHANAN, RESIDING AT GOOD MORNING, FROM CHARUVILA VEEDU, CHATHANNOOR, THAZHAM VADAKKECHERRY, MEENADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM. BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.VANDANA MENON SMT.ANJU P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 3. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEENAD, CHATHAMANNOOR, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 5. ASST. DIRECTOR OF RESURVEY, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 6. A.K.LUKE MUTHALALI, AGED 65 YEARS,S/O. ALEXANDER LUKE, SALIL KOYIPRATH BANGLAWIL, CHATHANNOOR, THAZHAM VADAKKU, NJAVAROOR KOYIPRATHU PUTHEN BANGLOW, MAMBALLIKKUNNATHU CHERRY, MEENADU, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 7. ELIYAMMA,AGED 70 YEARS, W/O. YACOB KURIKESU, JAYA BHAVAN, CHATHANNOOR, THAZHAM VADAKKU, MEENADU, KOLLAM.PIN-691 001 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.26682/2011 8. JACOB, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. YACOB KURIKESU, DO. 9. SARAMMA,AGED 45 YEARS, D/O.YACOB KURIKESU, DO. 10. ANNAMMA, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O.YACOB KURIKESU, DO. 11. THANKAMMA, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O.YACOB KURIKESU, DO. R1 TO R5 BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASHREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C)NO.26682/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE TAHSILDAR, QUILON DATED 22/11/1966 THE CERTIFIED COPY WHICH WAS OBTAINED FROM THE LAND TRIBUNAL, WHICH IS NOT LEGIBLE. EXT.P1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE TYPE WRITTEN ORDER OF EXT.P1. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, HEAD QUARTERS, QUILON TO THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 18/09/2010. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN PREPARED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR P.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI IN O.S.NO.401/1982. EXT.P3(A). TRUE COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT PREPARED BY ADV.K.REGHU VARMA IN O.S.NO.401/1982. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1196/1110 M.E. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1701 OF 1112 M.E. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF GIFT DEED NO.5529/1955 OF S.R.O., CHATHANNOOR DATED 17/12/1955. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3631/1958 OF S.R.O., CHATHANNOOR. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.5311/1960 OF S.R.O., CHATHANNOOR SRO DATED 13/08/1960. EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.5310/1960 OF CHATHANNOOR SRO EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF KURIKESHU DATED 13/08/1960. EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.811/1967 MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD ALLEGEDLY SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION IN O.S.811/1967 DATED 02/07/1968. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF EXT.P12 DATED 22/07/1968. EXT.P14 TRUE COPY OF THE DELIVERY KAICHEET DATED 24/07/1968. EXT.P15 TRUE COPY OF DEPOSITION OF SREEDHARAN IN SMP NO.6/93 BEFORE THE LAND TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM. EXT.P16 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/04/1976 IN O.A.NO.742/1975 LAND TRIBUNAL, QUILON. EXT.P17 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE DATED 19/6/1976 IN O.A.NO.742/1975 LAND TRIBUNAL, KOLLAM. 2/- -2- WP(C)NO.26682/2011 EXT.P18 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF CORRECTION BY THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR NO.K.FIN. 835/78/V-1. EXT.P19 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S.NO.164/78 MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P20 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS 164/78 MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P21 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 164/1978 DATED 08/04/1980 ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P22 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN OS 164/1978 DATED 08/04/1980 ADDL. MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P23 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 12/08/1981 IN A.S.43/1980 DISTRICT COURT, QUILON. EXT.P24 TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 12/08/1981 IN A.S.43/1980 DISTRICT COURT, QUILON. EXT.P25 TRUE COPY OF PLAINT RENUMBERED AS O.S.182/1992 (PREVIOUS NO.OS 1115/88). EXT.P26 TRUE COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN OS 182/1992 MUNSIFF COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P27 TRUE COPY OF COMMISSION REPORT IN OS NO.182/1992 SUBMITTED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER K.C.USHADEVI DATED 17/03/1993. EXT.P27(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN IN RESPECT OF THE ENTIRE PROPERTY COVERED UNDER SY.NOS.2082 AND 2083 IN O.S.NO.182/1992 MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR, PREPARED M.SIVADASAN, FIRST GRADE TALUK SURVEYOR, KOLLAM DATED 07/02/1993. EXT.P28 TRUE COPY OF COMMISSION REPORT IN O.S.NO.182/1992 MUNSIFF COURT, PARAVUR SUBMITTED BY ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER K.C.USHADEVI DATED 26/11/1997. EXT.P28(A). TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY T.C.GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, FIRST GRADE TALUK SURVEYOR IN O.S.NO.182/1992 MUNSIFF-MAGISTRATE COURT , PARAVUR. EXT.P29 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 17/08/2010 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE TALUK OFFICE ON SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).26682/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011 JUDGMENT The prayers sought in the writ petition are as follows:- (i). Call for the records leading to Ext.P1 and to quash the same (ii). To declare Ext.P1 as non-est and direct respondents 1 to 5 not to act upon in favour of respondents 7 to 11 and against the petitioner on the basis of Ext.P1. (iii). To declare that Ext.P1 is obtained by fraud and therefore non-est in law. (iv). To issue a direction directing respondents 1 to 5 to conduct an enquiry into the origin or creation of Ext.P1 and to take appropriate action against the persons responsible in accordance with law. 2. Thus, the case of the petitioner is that Ext.P1 proceedings of the Tahsildar, Kollam has been prudently created by predecessor of respondents 7 to 11 and therefore, is vitiated. 3. In my view, adjudication of such disputed factual issues is not possible in a proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and the remedy available to the petitioner is before the Civil Court, where parties can adduce evidence and disputed factual questions can be resolved. W.P.(C).26682/11 2 Therefore, I dismiss the writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the appropriate Civil Court. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs