Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 57301
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
P C MURALEEDHARAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 41615 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.P.SAREENA GEORGE, SMT.AVILA VICTORIA, SHRI.JOEL LIJU FRANCIS
For the Respondents: ADV.VIDHYA A.C.
Inaction by state authorities on registry transfer is impermissible where no appeal exists against prior orders.
Headnote:In the context of land registry transfer, the petitioner sought action against inaction by the respondents. The court observed that the absence of any appeal against the earlier order should not delay registry action. Thus, the Tahsildar was directed to act within two months on the applicant's request, ensuring compliance with existing law. Resultantly, an expedited decision was ordered regarding the petitioner's application.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner claims inaction on registry transfer. (Para 1) |
| 2. state's argument on appeal risk delaying action. (Para 2) |
| 3. court directs action despite the appeal risk. (Para 3 , 4) |
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 11th day of December, 2025 Petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents in effecting transfer of registry in respect of the petitioner's property. Petitioner purchased 5 acres of land in the year 2007 from one Chanthukutty, who obtained the same by virtue of Ext.P2 Purchase Certificate. Land ceiling proceedings were initiated against the predecessor of the said Chandukutty. The legal heirs of the said predecessor, by name Mammadkutty Haji, filed a C.R.P. before this Court, which was allowed. In that C.R.P. the petitioner was also impleaded as an additional respondent. The petitioner's property was also directed to be excluded from the purview of the land ceiling proceedings. It is accordingly that Ext.P4 Order has been passed by the Taluk Land Board. Now, on the strength of Ext.P4 Order, petitioner seeks mutation to be effected. The same is not being considered, is the short grievance.
2. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the solitary obstacle for effecting mutation is the possibility of an appeal, if any, to be preferred by the respondents against Ext.P4 Order of the Taluk Land Board. Learned Government Pleader would also submit that the property has to be identified before effecting transfer of registry.
3. This Court is of the opinion that the possibility of an appeal, if any, by the respondents cannot stand in the way of the transfer of registry sought for by the petitioner. It requires to be noticed that Ext.P4 Order was passed as early as in 2019, and no appeal so far has been preferred by anybody. Therefore, the transfer of registry sought for cannot wait until a decision is taken by the respondents in the matter of preferring an appeal against Ext.P4.
4. In the circumstances, there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent/Tahsildar to consider petitioner's application for transfer of registry in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent, for compliance.
The Writ Petition (Civil) will stand disposed of, as above.
