IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 2ND MARCH 2009 / 11TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 1785 of 2009(K) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SMITHA PANICKER, FLAT NO.F-2, CORAL NEST AVIYAR STREET, MEHTA NAGAR, CHOOLAMEDU, CHENNAI-69. BY ADV. MR.P.SANJAY MS.A.PARVATHI MENON MR.M.MUHAMMED SHAFI MR.J.ABHILASH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. BIJUKUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.LATE P.NARAYANA PILLAI, CHITHRA NAGAR, PEROORKADA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. MR.M.A.ASIF, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.1785/2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 24/04/2007. P2 : COPY OF the ENCUMBRANCE DATED 13/09/2007. P3 : COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08/01/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.1785 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of March, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's prayer is essentially for a direction to the respondents to effect mutation in respect of the property purchased by her as per Ext.P1. It would appear that the request made by the petitioner for effecting mutation in respect of the property was turned down by Ext.P3 order passed by the 2nd respondent. The reason stated in Ext.P3 is that there was an enquiry from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kochi regarding the assets of the 3rd respondent, the vendor of the petitioner. It is challenging Ext.P3, the writ petition is filed. 2. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that though the transfer in question vide Ext.P1 sale deed is seen to have taken place on 24/09/2007, much prior to the petitioner applied for effecting mutation in respect of the property, the aforesaid enquiry from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kochi was received by the 2nd respondent on 06/02/2008. It is stated that it was therefore that the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P3 WP(C) No.1785/2009 -2- order. 3. Going by the records produced in this case, the transfer in favour of the petitioner has been taken place in September, 2007. If that be so, it is long prior to the enquiry that was apparently received from the Criminal Court. As on the date of transfer, if there was no proceedings pending, there was no reason for the 2nd respondent taking the stand that mutation should not be granted. 4. In view of this, I quash Ext.P3 and direct the 2nd respondent to reconsider the application made by the petitioner, in the light of the aforesaid observations. Orders as directed above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg