IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 11303 of 2008(U) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. JOSEPH PETER, S/O.LATE KUNJACHAN PETER, SASTHAMANGALATHU HOUSE, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THOMAS PETER, S/O.LATE KUNJACHAN PETER, SASTHAMANGALATHU HOUSE, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. LEELAMMA PETER, D/O.LATE KUNJACHAN PETER SASTHAMANGALATHU HOUSE, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 4. VIMALA PETER, D/O.LATE KUNJACHAN PETER SASTHAMANGALATHU HOUSE, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. SANTHAMMA PETER,D/O.LATE KUNJACHAN PETER SASTHAMANGALATHU HOUSE, MANAKKARA MURI, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUR TALUK, SASTHAMCOTTA. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTA. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SASTHAMCOTTA. R1 TO R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER T.K.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.11303/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE GO(MS) 1829/77/RD DTD. 27.12.1977. P2:- COPY OF THE PATTA ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF LATE SRI.KUNJACHAN PETER. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN WA. 186/1980 DTD. 5.7.1985. P4:- COPY OF THE SITE PLAN PREPARED BY THE COURT COMMISSION AND MARKED AS EXT. C3 IN OS. 116/81 IN THE COURT OF SUBORDINATE JUDGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 30.6.1984 OF THE HONOURABLE SUBORDINATE JUDGE, PATHANAMTHITTA IN OS. 116/81. P6:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 31.10.1990 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA IN APEAL SUIT NO.177/1985. P7:- COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTA SHOWING REMITTANCE OF LAND TAX IN RESPECT OF THE 42 CENTS OF LAND IN SY. NO.576/1 IN SASTHAMCOTTA VILLAGE IN KUNNATHUR TALUK. P8:- COPY OF THE REPROT SUBMTITED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TAHASILDAR TO THE IST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DTD. 31.10.2005. P9:- COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMTITED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TAHASILDAR TO THE IST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR DT. 18.5.2006. P10:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED JOINTLY BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT, DTD. 28.3.2007. P11:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, DTD. 14.6.2007 IN WPC. 18300/07. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No.11303 of 2008 --------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of October 2010 J U D G M E N T Issue raised in this writ petition is the claim of the petitioners for payment of land tax in respect of the property which was assigned in favour of their father. Petitioners submit that, that property was a Kayal Purampoke and was an encroachment property. It is stated by Ext.P1 order dated 27.12.1977 the Government accorded sanction to assign on registry of land having extent of 28.16 acres in Survey No.576/1 of Sasthamcotta Village, to the occupants realising land value at concessional rates. Accordingly, in LAC No.27/77, petitioners' father late Sri.Kunjachan Peter was assigned 77 cents of land. Ext.P2 is the copy of Patta produced by the petitioners. According to the petitioners on the strength of Ext.P2, their father was W.P.(C) No.11303 of 2008 -: 2 :- in possession of the property and that the property was mutated in his name and tax was also being paid on that basis. Petitioners submitted that such payments were accepted till 1999 and Ext.P7 is the tax receipt evidencing payment of the tax for the year 1999. 2. According to the petitioners, during 1978 Travancore Devaswom Board claimed title and possession of the property and filed Original Petition before this Court as O.P.No.3361/1978, which was dismissed and that thereafter the Board filed Writ Appeal No.186/1980 which was also dismissed by Ext.P3 judgment, holding that the Board did not have any property in Survey No.576/1. Petitioners also submit that O.S.No.116/1981 was filed by their father for declaration of his title and possession in respect of the property covered by Ext.P2 and by Ext.P5 judgment, the Sub Court, Pathanamthitta declared the plaintiff's title and possession of the property mentioned above. Petitioners state that, in the mean while their father W.P.(C) No.11303 of 2008 -: 3 :- sold 35 cents of land and continued in possession of the remaining extent of property. According to the petitioners, on expiry of their father, being the legal heirs, they retained possession of the property and it was while so, the tax was refused to be accepted by the Village Officer for the period from 2000. 3. Petitioners filed Ext.P10 representation complaining about the refusal of the 3rd respondent to accept the tax in respect of the property. There was no response on the representation, thereupon they approached this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.18300 of 2007, and that writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P11 judgment with the direction that the District Collector shall decide on Ext.P10 representation. According to the petitioners during the course of the hearing they were informed about Exts.P8 and P9 reports submitted by the Tahasildar. It is stated that on relying on the aforesaid reports, the District Collector rejected their representation as per Ext.P12 order, it is W.P.(C) No.11303 of 2008 -: 4 :- challenging Ext.P12 this writ petition is filed. 4. A reading of Ext.P12 order shows that referring to Exts.P8 and P9 reports of the Tahasildar, the District Collector doubted the genuineness of the Patta, the possession of the property and identity of the property claimed by the petitioner. This plea contained in Ext.P12 is reiterated in the counter affidavit filed also. As far as this writ petition is concerned, the only issue is whether the tax in respect of the property covered by Ext.P2 is liable to be accepted. This Court is neither concerned with the possession of the property nor the genuineness of the Patta , which are matters of the respective authorities to decide in appropriate proceedings. As at present, Ext.P2 Patta relied on by the petitioners, which is accepted by the Civil Court in Ext.P12 judgment, still remains in force. It was on the strength of Ext.P2 Patta that the property was mutated in the name of the petitioners' father and that mutation still remains valid even as on date. Therefore, even W.P.(C) No.11303 of 2008 -: 5 :- though the Government is not a party to Ext.P10 judgment, facts remains that the property stands mutated in the name of the petitioner's father and being the legal heirs, petitioners are entitled to pay tax in respect of the property, though it will not by itself, determine title of the property in favour of the petitioners in view of the provisions contained in the Transfer of Registry Rules. Therefore, it is directed that the respondents will accept tax in respect of the property which stands mutated in the name of the deceased father of the petitioners. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything conclusively on the identity of the property, its possession or the genuineness of the Patta relied on by the petitioner. Writ petition is disposed of by aforesaid proceedings. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt