In property disputes involving mutation, prior issuance of pattas and longstanding possession outweigh recent classifications of land use.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P11 to the extent it treated the property comprised in Survey No.4/1 having an extent of 5.96 Ares as ‘puzha purambokku’ and declining mutation in respect of the said property. The petitioner is in possession and title of 33.523 cents of land in Survey No.24/13 of Puthenvelikkara Village of Parur Taluk, Ernakulam District. Originally, the said land was in possession and ownership of one Vithayathil Baby, who obtained a purchase certificate for 46 cents of land in Survey No.24/13 of Puthenvelikkara Village by virtue of Ext.P1 patta dated 02.10.1974 as per the proceedings of the Land Tribunal, Parakkadavu. Thereafter, the petitioner purchased 36.502 cents of land by Ext.P2 registered sale deed. Later, by another registered deed, out of this 36.502 cents, 1.375 cent was given to Vithayathil Baby and thereafter the extent of property under the possession and title of the petitioner in Survey No.24/13 is only 33.523 cents. The petitioner approached the authorities for effecting mutation and for remittance of tax and the Village Officer informed her that there are some confusions regarding the survey records and only after resurvey, the request of the petitioner for effecting mutation will be considered. Since there was inordinate delay, the petitioner again submitted Ext.P3 application for effecting mutation and thereafter approached the Tahsildar as evident from Ext.P4. The Tahsildar, after verification, issued Ext.P5 reply stating that further proceedings in the application will be taken only after measurement and verification of the land by the Taluk Surveyor since the Village Officer could not identify the land. The petitioner has also approached the revenue adalath and in the said adalath the District Collector issued Ext.P6 directing the Tahsildar to complete the survey and to settle the issue. Later, the Tahsildar, as per Ext.P7 letter, intimated the petitioner that after the survey and verification of the land, the land in possession of the petitioner is now in Survey Nos.24/13, 24/14 and 24/15 and advised the petitioner to approach the Land Tribunal, Tripunithura, to effect necessary corrections in the purchase certificate and pattayam. The petitioner would contend that from the above, it will be seen that the petitioner is in possession of the extent of land as mentioned above, ie.33.523 cents, and the finding is only to the effect that the properties are now in Survey Nos.24/13, 24/14 and

24/15.

2. Since there was delay in finalising the proceedings, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing WP(C) No.3625 of 2020, which was disposed of by Ext.P10 judgment dated 23.09.2021 directing the 1^st respondent to consider the request submitted by the petitioner and to finalise the proceedings. Based on the said direction, Ext.P11 order has been issued taking a stand that out of 13.57 Ares of land in possession of the petitioner, she is entitled only for mutation of 7.61 Ares and the mutation cannot be effected to the balance land of 5.96 Ares since it is a ‘puzha purambokku’. The petitioner submits that the findings in Ext.P7 to the extent it treated 5.96 Ares comprised in Survey No.4/1 as ‘puzha purambokku’ is absolutely arbitrary and illegal inasmuch as Ext.P1 purchase certificate was issued as early as on 25.04.1973, after conducting necessary survey and enquiry in this regard.

3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that in the survey conducted, it was found that the survey number mentioned in Ext.P1 is erroneous and that an extent of 5.96 Ares,comprised in Survey No.4/1, is a ‘puzha purambokku’, for which mutation cannot be effected.

4. The petitioner submits