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

2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 14685

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANU SIVARAMAN, J
NOUSHAD – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN, SMT.A.R.PRAVITHA, SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.E.S.ASHRAF

JUDGMENT

1.The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:-

“i)to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P3 and quash the same.

ii) to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ or order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to effect mutation of the property covered by Ext.P1 and to accept basic tax from the petitioner in respect of the property within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.”

2.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has purchased the property by Exhibit P1 sale deed and had made applications before the 1st respondent for effecting mutation and for acceptance of basic tax. The same W.P.(C).No18164/18 has been rejected by Exhibit P3 stating that there is a suit pending in respect of the property as O.S.No.17/2018 before the Munsiff Magistrate's Court, Pattambi and I.A.No.130/2018 is also pending. It is stated that till the suit is finally decided, mutation cannot be effected.

4. The petitioner has produced the order of the Munsiffs'

M

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