IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2010 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 17932 of 2009(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ SUKUMARAN. S, S/O.P.K. SANKARANKUTTY, AGED 63 YEARS, SURABHI, DURGA NAGAR, MANAPPULLYKAVU, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. MR.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, PALAKKAD. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAPULLY II VILLAGE PALAKKAD. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K. RAMESH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO. 17932/2009-J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.3933 OF 2004/1 OF PALAKKAD S.R.O. EXT.P2: COPIES OF THE BASIC TAX PAID RECEIPTS RELATING TO THE PROPERTY. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE IN RELATION TO THE PROPERTY. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 07/05/2004 ISSUED BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REGISTERED GIFT DEED NO.1383 OF 1969. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.62/1961 EXECUTED BY MEERA SAHIB RAVUTHAR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE rs. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 17932 of 2009-J - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 8th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The main prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the third respondent to collect basic land tax from the petitioner in respect of the property described in para 2 of the writ petition and to issue a possession certificate. 2. The petitioner purchased certain items of properties comprised in different survey numbers in Thenari amsom and desom, Elapully II Village, Palakkad Taluk, Palakkad District as per Ext.P1 sale deed from one Shri Abdul Gafoor. The said property along with other items of properties originally belonged to late Abdul Kareem Ravuther, as per settlement deed No.62/1961 of SRO, Palakkad. As per gift deed No.1283/1969 he gifted the properties to his brother's son Abdul Gafoor. After the purchase, the petitioner has paid the basic tax and was issued Ext.P2 receipt. Ext.P3 is the copy of the possession certificate. The petitioner wanted to have a fresh possession certificate and receipt showing land tax for production before a financial institution. He was given information that the property is involved in a ceiling case before the Taluk Land Board. According to the petitioner, wpc 17932/2009 2 the same is not involved in any ceiling case. According to the petitioner, even if the property is involved in any ceiling case, his rights are protected by Section 85(8) and 106-B of the Land Reforms Act. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the third respondent. It is averred therein that the Taluk Land Board, Palakkad as per order No.1455/79 dated 18.12.1990 has ordered the Village Officer, Elappully II to take possession an extent of 5.00 acres of land in various survey numbers, on 25.8.1993. The above lands were possessed by Shri Abdul Gafoor, the vendor of the petitioner. A ceiling case was pending before the Taluk Land Board, in the name of Smt. Badaruja Umma, the mother of Shri Abdul Gafoor. The vendor of the petitioner, concealing this fact, sold the property to the petitioner which was already taken possession under the ceiling case. Thus, the third respondent has taken the stand that the petitioner was not issued the possession certificate as the land mentioned in the document includes excess land possessed by the Government. The boundaries shown in the document was totally false and no land in the document was seen possessed by the petitioner legally. Finally, it is observed that if the writ petition is allowed, the Government will suffer huge loss by way of losing an extent of 1.23 acres of land. 4. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit disputing the averments wpc 17932/2009 3 in the counter affidavit and by producing a copy of the registered gift deed No.1383/1969 and another registered document No.62/1961. 5. Even though learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the contentions raised by the respondents cannot be accepted and there may be a direction to receive land tax and to issue possession certificate, learned Government Pleader submitted that in the light of the facts revealed from the counter affidavit, he is not entitled for such a direction from this Court. It is submitted that the mother of the vendor had surrendered the land in the ceiling case and therefore her son cannot have any right at all to part away with the property. 6. Since disputed questions of facts exist, this Court may not be justified in entering any findings on such facts. Even though various documents have been produced by the petitioner, the competent authority will have to go into in detail in respect of the contentions of the petitioner and take a decision in the matter. Therefore, it is only appropriate that the Tahsildar is directed to take a decision after hearing the petitioner. The second respondent will therefore afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and then take an appropriate decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. All the documents including the proceedings of the Taluk Land Board and other wpc 17932/2009 4 materials produced by the petitioner will be taken into consideration and an appropriate reply will be given to the petitioner in the matter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/