Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S.
Harrisons Malayalam Limited – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Its Chief Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and possession of estates confirmed for over 100 years. (Para 1 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. petitioner's claims of ownership disputed by the state. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. conditions for cutting trees enforced as per statutes. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. revenue records do not confer property title. (Para 21 , 22 , 26 , 30) |
JUDGMENT :
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner, namely, M/s. Harrisons Malayalam Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act 1956, having its registered office at Bristow Road, Willingdon Island, Cochin, has filed W.P.(C)No.20484 of 2020, invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P7 Government order, i.e., G.O.(Ms.)No.172/2019/Rev. dated 06.06.2019 issued by the 1st respondent State, Ext.P10 notice dated 05.09.2020 issued by the 6th respondent Village Officer, Chinnakkanal, Ext.P11 notice dated 11.09.2020 issued by the 5th respondent Range Forest Officer, Devikulam, Ext.P12 communication dated 09.09.2020 issued by the 4th respondent Divisional Forest Officer, Munnar Division to the 5th respondent Range Forest Officer, Devikulam and Ext.P13 notice dated 11
The imposition of conditions on land tax acceptance under G.O. dated 06.06.2019 was held illegal, infringing on the petitioner's statutory rights and subjecting property ownership claims to arbitrary....
Disputes regarding title and possession of land necessitate proper judicial scrutiny, especially where evictions under the Land Conservancy Act are challenged on grounds of legitimate claims. Governm....
The court upheld the State's authority to declare land as reserved forest, emphasizing that tenure-holders cannot claim proprietary rights over such land post-abolition of Zamindari.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that disputed questions of fact relating to title and possession should be decided by the competent civil court, and the power of judicial review i....
Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to determine land title disputes, which must be settled in civil courts, rendering related appeals maintainable under proper legal challenges.
Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to resolve title disputes over land, which must be adjudicated in civil court.
The court ruled that prior permissions regarding land use are limited and require statutory application for any changes in tenure, reaffirming the need for compliance with land laws.
Permitting land use under Clause 6(2) does not extend to unauthorized reclamation, and remedies lie in approaching statutory authorities per Section 27A of the Paddy Act.
Permitting land use under Clause 6(2) does not extend to unauthorized reclamation, and remedies lie in approaching statutory authorities per Section 27A of the Paddy Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
