SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Ker) 900

ALEXANDER THOMAS
Viswambaran – Appellant
Versus
Tahsildar, Thiruvalla Office of the Tahsildar – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Advs. Sri. George Cherian (Sr.), Smt. K.S. Santhi, Smt. Latha Susan Cherian.
For the Respondents: Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, Sr. Govt. Pleader

Judgement Key Points

What is the scope of the Kerala Land Tax Act and Transfer of Registry Rules in mutation and tax collection, and can revenue officials adjudicate on title disputes? What are the legal consequences of revenue officials exceeding their limited discretionary functions when dealing with mutation and basic land tax in relation to title disputes? What is the appropriate remedy or directive a court should issue when a Tahsildar’s order rejecting mutation is found illegal or ultra vires?

What is the scope of the Kerala Land Tax Act and Transfer of Registry Rules in mutation and tax collection, and can revenue officials adjudicate on title disputes?

What are the legal consequences of revenue officials exceeding their limited discretionary functions when dealing with mutation and basic land tax in relation to title disputes?

What is the appropriate remedy or directive a court should issue when a Tahsildar’s order rejecting mutation is found illegal or ultra vires?


JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned Ext.P-5 order dated 10.10.2018 issued by the 1st respondent-Tahsildar, whereby in request for grant of mutation of the property, in respect of the property covered by Exts.P-1 & P-4 have been rejected.

2. The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

“(i) issue a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order or direction quashing Exhibit P5 order.

(ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order of direction, directing the respondents to effect mutation in respect of 1.21 ares of land in re-survey No.322/6/1/2 of Peringara Village covered by Exhibit P1 in favour of the petitioner and his wife.

(iii) to issue such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;

and

(iv) award costs of the proceedings to the petitioner.”

3. Heard Sri. George Cherian, learned senior counsel instructed by Sri. K.S. Santhi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Sr. Government Pleader appearing for respondents.

4. For and on behalf of one Sri. Chacko Varghese, his power of attorney constituted as per Ext.P-2 power of atto














Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top