IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI MONDAY, THE 27^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 7TH MAGHA, 1946 WP(C) NO. 38876 OF 2024 PETITIONERS:

1 SIJU C.P AGED 52 YEARS S/O. C.N. PEETHAMBARAN, CHUNGATH HOUSE, VALOOR, CHERUVALLOOR PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 308

2 MAYADAS AGED 49 YEARS W/O. SIJU, CHUNGATH HOUSE, VALOOR, CHERUVALLOOR PO, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN – 680 308 BY ADV BIJU .C. ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS:

1 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL)

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), KPCC JUNCTION, OPPOSITE MAHARAJA’S GROUND, SHENOYS, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682 011

2 THE SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR, THRIKKARA, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682 030

3 M/S. SAN MICHALES BUILDERS AGED 67 YEARS REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER JOSEY STEPHEN , DOOR NO. 3/225B, KOYIKKARANPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAKKANAD DESOM, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, THRIKKAKARA PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682 021

4 REGINA JOSEPHINA AGED 60 YEARS W/O. JOSEY STEPHEN, DOOR NO. 3/225B, KOYIKKARANPARAMBIL HOUSE, KAKKANAD DESOM, VAZHAKKALA VILLAGE, THRIKKAKARA PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682 021 SRI. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE. GP.

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

T.R.RAVI.J -------------------------------------------------------

WP(C) No.38876 of 2024 --------------------------------------------------------

Dated this the 27^th day of January, 2025 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent is refusing to register Ext.P5 rectification deed.

2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2^nd respondent wherein it is stated that there is a total change of the physical status of the apartment going by the description in Ext.P1 title deed and Ext.P5 rectification deed. The said contention is sought to be explained by extracting the two descriptions in paragraph Nos.4 and 5 of the counter affidavit. A reading of the the descriptions would show that there is absolutely no substantial difference in the physical status. The apartment has been issued with a Door Number by the Local Self Government and the description in Exts.P1 and P5 shows the same Door Number. As long as there is no difference in the Door Number, a correction of the apartment numbers would not bring any change in the physical status of the apartment. The area of the apartment shown is also the same. The only additional factum that has been added is the position of the apartment, which again would not change the physical status, since the Door Number does not differ.

3. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. There will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to register the rectification deed as and when the same is presented for registration, provided, the petitioner complies with all other further formalities and the registration shall not be refused for the reason which is stated in the counter affidavit.

Sd/-

T.R.RAVI JUDGE

sn

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 38876/2024 PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 3321/2015 DATED 20/10/2015 Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.

3658/1/2019 DATED 26/12/2019 EVIDENCING THE PURCHASE OF THE PARKING AREA FOR THE PETITIONERS FLAT BEARING NO. B5 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 29/2/2024 ISSUED BY THE ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN M.C.

NO. 589/2022 Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 1/7/2024 SUBMITTED BY THRIKKARA MUNICIPALITY IN W.P.

(C). NO. 8763/2024 Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RECTIFICATION DEED DATED

15/6/2024 THUS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE RESPONDENT NOS.1 & 2 Exhibit P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 3/10/2024 PASSED BY THIS HON’BLE COURT IN W.P.(C). NO.

38672/2022