IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2009 / 12TH PHALGUNA 1930 OP.No. 26944 of 1999(G) ----------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DR. SHYAMADAS, D/O. KUNHIKANNAN, MALABAR HOSPITAL, IRITTY, KANNUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.RAMADASAN SRI.A.K.ALEX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHIEF SECRETARY TO STATE, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (IRRIGATION DEPT.), P.Y. I.P. MAINTENANCE SUB DIVISION, POST. MATTANNUR, KANNUR DT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/03/2009, THE COURT, ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 26944/1999 --------------------------------------------------------------- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF ASSIGNMENT DEED DT. 2-2-1978. EXT.P2 NOTICE DT. 22-3-1978. EXT.P3 LAND REVENUE RECEIPT DT. 17-10-1998. EXT.P4 CERTIFICATE DT. 19-4-1990. EXT.P5 EXPLANATION DT. 23-7-1991. EXT.P6 NOTICE DT. 23-11-1996. EXT.P7 NOTICE DT. 16-9-1999. EXT.P8 COPY OF SKETCH PLAN. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 26944 of 1999 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 3rd March, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner purchased certain property by Ext. P1 assignment deed. Alleging that, part of that property comprised of Government land, proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. Ultimately, those proceedings ended in evicting the petitioner from 95 sq. meters of Government land. The petitioner is now aggrieved by Ext. P7 order by which the petitioner has been directed to pay penal rent at the rate of Rs.200/- per day for the unauthorised occupation of the Government land. 2. The petitioners contention is that she obtained the land as per Ext. P1 assignment deed. She was not aware of the same being Government land. In fact, according to the petitioner, the petitioner has been repeatedly requesting the respondents to measure the land and demarcate the boundaries, which was ultimately done only as per directions of this Court in another original petition. Therefore, the petitioner contends that the petitioner should not be mulcted with penal rent as directed in Ext. P7. 3. The learned Government Pleader opposes the contention. According to the learned Government Pleader, the petitioner having been evicted from unauthorised occupation of the Government land, the petitioner is liable to pay penal rent. 4. I have considered the rival contentions in detail. 5. The respondents have no case that the petitioner had constructed any structures in the 95 sq. meters of land from which the petitioner was evicted. I am not satisfied that the petitioner was deliberately clinging on to Government land. From the circumstances of the case, it is evident that the petitioner bona fide thought that the land belongs to her, which she obtained by Ext. P1 assignment deed. It has also come out that the measurement was O.P. No. 26944/1999 -: 2 :- done long after on a direction of this Court. Nothing prevented the respondents from measuring the properties at the earliest opportunity as requested by the petitioner. In the above circumstances, I do not think that the petitioner should be mulcted with penal rent. Therefore, Ext. P7 is quashed. The original petition is allowed as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/