IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2008 / 6TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 21667 of 2008(D) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. P.USMAN, 55 YEARS, S/O.MOHAMMED, PARATHODI HOUSE PATTAMBI PO., PALAKKAD 2. AZYA, W/O.P.USMAN, DO.DO. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH SRI.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUB REGISTRAR, PATTAMBI, O/O.THE SUB REGISTRAR, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD. 3. T.A.MOHAMMED HUSSAIN, S/O.LATE T.A. MAMMOOTTY, THERUVATHAKATH HOUSE, PATTAMBI.PO., PALAKKAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 21667 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 28th July, 2008. J U D G M E N T The petitioner submitted a sale deed for registration before the 2nd respondent. The same was refused to be registered as per Ext. P4 order on the ground that there is an injunction order in I.A.No. 956/07 in O.S.No. 104/98 of the Munsiff's Court, Pattambi against such registration. The contention of the petitioner is that, that injunction order was quashed by this Court by Ext. P2 judgment and therefore Ext. P4 order is clearly against Ext. P2 judgment of this Court. The petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs: “(i) Issue any writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext. P4 and quash Ext. P4. (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to register the original of Ext. P3 sale deed immediately within such short time that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant.” 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. The learned Government Pleader could not controvert the fact that by Ext. P2 judgment, the injunction order has been quashed. That being so, clearly, Ext. P4 is on a wrong understanding of the situation. Therefore, Ext. P4 is liable to be quashed. I do so. There will be a further direction to the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner within a period of three months, provided the other statutory conditions are satisfied. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.