IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 20TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 18452 of 2008(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- E.N.VASUDEVAN NAMPOOTHIRI S/O E.K. NARAYANAN NAMPOOTHIRI, AGED 64 YEARS, EDMANA ILLAM,EDANADU P.O., PALA 686 574. BY ADV. MR.C.A.CHACKO MS.C.M.CHARISMA MR.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR OF REGISTRATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, 3. THE SUB REGISTRAR, REGISTER OFFICE, KUNNAMKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR MS. M.R. SREELATHA FOR R1-3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).18452/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.P1:- TRUE COPY OF THE WILL DATED 5.1.03 EXECUTED BY SMT. SANTHAKUMARI IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER. EXT.P2:- TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED DT. 4.4.2008 IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONER'S SON JISHNU V. DEV. EXT.P3:- TRUE COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DT.8.4.2008 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENTS. EXT.P4:- TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED NIL SENT TO 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL Okb - TRUE COPY - P.A. TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18452 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 9th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Prayer sought in this writ petition is for a direction to the 3rd respondent to register Exhibit P2 settlement deed forthwith. According to the petitioner, in respect of property which devolved on the petitioner as per Exhibit P1 Will, Exhibit P2 settlement deed has been executed by him in favour of his son. Though the document was presented for registration, the 3rd respondent refused to do so and thereupon this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner . 2. Referring to the counter affidavit filed by the respondents 2 and 3, learned Government Pleader submits that in respect of the property certain complaints were received by the District Collector, which were forwarded to the 3rd respondent. It is also stated that the petitioner could not produce any documents showing that he had title over the property in question. It is stated that it was therefore, that document was not registered, particularly taking into account the complaint that were received by the District Collector. 3. As already noted, the stand of the petitioner is that on W.P.(C) No. 18452 /2008 2 the basis of Exhibit P1 Will the property devolved on him. It is stated that though petitioner had produced Exhibit P1 document before the 3rd respondent ignoring the same, the document was refused to be registered. 4. The stand of the respondent as noted is that the petitioner did produce any document to prove his title over the property. While, petitioner contents that he produced Exhibit P1 title deed before the 3rd respondent, petitioner also offers to produce the title deed before the 3rd respondent, if so directed. 5. Taking into account the submission as above, the writ petition is disposed of directing that it will be open to the petitioner to produce Exhibit P2 settlement deed for registration along with Exhibit P1 Will, in which case, the 3rd respondent shall examine the same and deal with the request for registration in accordance with law. Petitioner shall produce the documents before the 3rd respondent and the 3rd respondent shall consider the same without any further delay. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm