IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2011 / 2ND BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 22929 of 2011(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.LAKSHMI, AGED 62 YEARS, W/O.RAMAN, PADINJARE VEETTIL, PADINJAREKKARA, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT SRI.K.N.ABHILASH SMT.R.LEELA SMT.N.K.SHEEBA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, HOSDURG TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KANJAGADU, KASARAGOD, PIN-671 315. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KODAKKADU VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD, PIN-671357. SR GP SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 22929 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- THE TRUE COPY OF THE WILL NO.42/1992 OF THE SRO THRIKARIPUR DATED 6.7.92 EXECUTED BY MR.RAMAN EXT.P2- THE TRUE COPY OF the WILL NO.15/1996 OF THE SRO THRIKARIPUR DATED 26.3.96 EXECUTED BY MR.RAMAN EXT.P3- THE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT LETTER DATED 5.2.1994 EXECUTED BY CHILDREN OF THE DECEASED RAMAN EXT.P4- THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 13.5.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P5- THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 6.8.2010 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT (True copy) P.A.To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).22929/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 24th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be the exclusive owner of 59 cents of land in R.S.154/1 of Kodkadu Village in Hosdurg Taluk. According to the petitioner, she inherited the property as per Exts.P1 and P2 wills which are registered documents. It is stated that despite the above, when tax was refused to be accepted she made Ext.P4 complaint to the second respondent, the Village Officer and in response thereto, she was given Ext.P5 reply to the effect that, other legal heirs of the deceased, who have executed the wills, should relinquish their rights over the property, by a registered document. Petitioner submits that she being the exclusive legatee as per the wills, even in the absence of any relinquishment by other legal heirs of the deceased, tax is bound to be accepted. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, Exts.P1 and P2 registered documents are in her favour, she is fully justified in the contentions. Therefore I direct that, on the production of a copy of this judgment, the second respondent will examine the will and if it is found that the petitioner is the sole legatee of the property in W.P.(C).22929/11 2 respect of which tax is tendered, without insisting for any relinquishment as required by Ext.P5, payments will be accepted. 3. Petitioner to produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs