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

2023 Supreme(Online)(KER) 3742

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
GOPINATH P, J
M.K.YACOB – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent


Advocates:
ADV KAROL MATHEWS SEBASTIAN ALENCHERRY, SMT. PREETHA K.K., SRI. ISSAC.M.PERUMPILLIL

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the fact that despite the finding by the 3rd respondent that there was a mistake in the resurvey conducted in so far as it relates to the property of the petitioner (as is evident from Ext.P3), the necessary corrections in the resurvey sketch have not been carried out for want of No Objection Certificate from the 2nd respondent Panchayat.

2. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit wherein, in paragraph 5, it is states as follows:- “5. It is submitted that the land was inspected and records were examined by the Taluk Surveyor and such examination revealed that in Re-Survey records, Road Puramboke (Re.sy.No.133/14) is situated in the western part of the petitioner's property (Re.Sy No.133/16). A clear boundary existed between the property of the petitioner (133/16) and Road Puramboke (133/14). At the time of the preparation of the resurvey records, the R-Survey officials drew the boundary line between the existing clear boundary. Because of this error, some extent of property of the petitioner was wrongly included in Re-survey No.133/14 as road puramboke land. For correcting this mistakes surveyor prepared a

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