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

2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13400

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


Advocates:
P.D.SUBRAMANIAN NAMPOOTHIRI, DIVYA C BALAN

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

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