Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
JOSE MANGALY MATHACHAN – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to resurvey sketch with alleged mistakes. (Para 1) |
| 2. arguments heard from both sides. (Para 2) |
| 3. complaint treated as a revision under law. (Para 3) |
| 4. court's directive for the collector's action. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioners have approached this Court challenging Ext.P5 sketch, essentially contending that a mistake has crept in the resurvey proceedings. The petitioners submit that Ext.P4 is the complaint preferred by them before the District Collector in this regard. The petitioner relies on Ext.P7 communication issued by the Tahsildar(LR), Aluva dated 24.06.2024 in support of their contentions.
2. Heard the rival contentions on both sides, including the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the additional 6th respondent.
3. The complaint raised by the petitioners is essentially with regard to an alleged mistake in the resurvey, for which there is an effective remedy available to the petitioners by way of a revision before the Collector as provided under Section 13A of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 . It is seen that Ext.P4 complaint has already been filed by the petitio
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
