HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Ziyad Rahman A. A, J
SURESHBABU P.S. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT – Respondent
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is the owner in possession of 2.83 Ares of property comprised in the Survey No.265/3-6 of Palakuzha Village in Muvattupuzha Taluk. The said property was purchased by the petitioner as per Ext.P1 order dated 10.02.2022.
2. Earlier, the predecessor in interest of the petitioner submitted an application in Form 6 before the 3rd respondent, as early as on 13.12.2021. The said application was submitted in view of the fact that, the property was described as ‘Nilam’ in the revenue records, eventhough the same was not included in the Data Bank. The said application was considered by the 3rd respondent and it resulted in Ext.P3, by which, the same was allowed. In Ext.P3 order, a specific finding was entered into, to the effect that the property owned by the predecessor in interest of the petitioner does not come within the definition of paddy land or wet land, as per the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008 , and the property was reclaimed prior to 12.08.2008.
3. Ext.P3 order was passed after being convinced of the said fact, by permitting the petitioner to reclaim the said land. In the meantime, the petitioner purchased the said property as per Ex
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.