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

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 21613

VIJAYAN U.K – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent


Advocates:
['P JAYARAM', '', 'GIGI PAPPACHAN', 'K R PAUL']

JUDGMENT

The petitioner says that he and his other family members are in ownership of about 90 cents of land, along with a house, with respect to which a suit for partition – namely O.S.No.146/2012 before the Munsiff's Court, Pattambi – had been filed. He says that the suit was decreed, which is evident from Ext.P1 and that an appeal had been filed by him and certain other defendants therein, which has been numbered as A.S.No.103/2014 before the Sub Court, Ottappalam.

2. The petitioner says that the parties have now entered into a compromise, as per which, some of them have agreed to execute a relinquishment deed in his favour, but that when he approached the 4th respondent - Sub Registrar, for registration of the same, it has been declined saying that a “Thandaper” account has to be first assigned in his favour. He says that he, therefore, approached the Village Officer through an application, but that this has been now rejected through Ext.P3 by the said Authority, merely saying that a “Thandaper” account can be assigned only subject to the appeal and in no other manner.

3. The petitioner contends that Ext.P3 is improper and that, in any event of the matter, the 4th respondent – Su

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