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

2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 47886

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ALEXANDER THOMAS, J
M V FRANCIS OOMMEN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


JUDGMENT

The petitioner claims that he is having properties in old Survey Nos.106/1, 106/2 and 106/10 of Nedumpram Village, Thiruvalla Taluk, Pathanamthitta Revenue District and that adjacent to his property there is a puramboke thodu situated in old Survey No.106/3. The petitioner's case is that after the re- survey, 1Ares of petitioner's property was wrongly left out and incorporated in new sub-division. The said piece of land is essential for the beneficial enjoyment of the other properties of the petitioner and that even in the predecessors-in-interest of the petitioner, were in possession of the said property. Since there was no cultivation for quite some years, the said piece of land remains reclaimed by nature. That the said piece of land has been wrongly incorporated in the Basic Tax Register (B.T.R) as bhoostithivazhi and the same has now been interpolated as “nalathuvazhi or thodu”, it is averred. The petitioner would assert that it is not a puramboke. To fortify the said contention, the petitioner would place reliance on an order of the Government which according to him would make it clear that land described as bhoostithivazhi or nalathuvazhi is not a puramboke. That th

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