As the issues raised in both these cases are

same, these matters are disposed of on the basis

of this common judgment. W.P.(C)No.33162 of 2018

is taken as the lead case.

W.P.(C)No.33162 of 2018

2.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the

refusal on the part of the second respondent Sub

Registrar in registering Ext.P5 settlement deed

executed by him in favour of his son, on the

ground that the petitioner has not produced the

prior title deed in respect of the said property.

3.

The prayers in this writ petition (civil)

are as follows:-

“i.

To issue a writ of mandamus or any

other writ or order commanding the 2^nd

respondent to accept and register

..4..

Exhibit P-5 settlement deed executed by

the petitioner, without delay.

And

ii.

To grant such other reliefs as

just and proper in the facts of the

case.”

4.

Heard Sri.John Joseph Roy, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner and

Smt.A.C.Vidhya, learned Government Pleader

appearing for the respondents.

5.

According to the petitioner, he is the

absolute owner in possession and enjoyment of

21.64 Ares of property comprised in Sy.No.1/1-A

(Re.Sy.No.129/9

in

Block

No.39)

of

Kizhakkenchery-II

Village,

Alathur

Taluk,

Palakkad District, which he obtained from his

parents. According to the petitioner, he has

possessed the said property for a very long time.

The extent of the property in possession and

enjoyment of the petitioner is stated to be 21.64

Ares (53.47 cents). The said extent along with

..5..

other property having an extent of 1.16 hectares

with ‘virivu’ was mutated in the name of the

petitioner’s father. That before the death of the

petitioner’s father, the said property was

divided and given to his children, viz., the

petitioner and his brother (Varkey) and it was

enjoyed separately by them. According to the

petitioner, the materials like, the Basic Tax

Register (BTR) in respect of the above said

property comprised in Re.Sy.No.129/9, Ext.P2 land

tax receipt, Ext.P3 possession certificate and

Thandaper account extract in respect of the above

said property with Thandaper No.4153 will prove

that the property is that of the petitioner. It

is further stated that, since the property was

separately enjoyed by the petitioner and his

brother, the revenue authorities had accepted the

land tax in respect of the respective properties

in the name of the petitioner and his brother.

..6..

The petitioner is paying land tax in respect of

the property in his possession coming to 21.64

Ares. Further it is stated that after

ascertaining the actual possession and enjoyment

of the property, the Revenue Authorities and the

Resurvey Department also recognized the possession

and enjoyment of the above said property of the

petitioner, it is averred. It is further stated

that the petitioner has thus assigned the said

21.64 Ares of property by settling the same in

favour of his son (Shibu Joseph) and has executed

Ext.P5 settlement deed dated 03.09.2018 settling

the said property in favour of his son. When

Ext.P5 was sought to be present for registration,

the second respondent Sub Registrar, SRO,

Vadakkanchery has refused to act upon the same on

the ground that the petitioner has not been able

to produce any prior title deed of the property

showing the ownership of the petitioner. It is

..7..

in the light of these aspects that the petitioner

has filed this writ petition (civil) with the

afore-mentioned prayers.

6.

The matter in issue is no longer res

integra and it is by now well established that

even if the vendor is not able to produce prior

title deeds, so long as he can validly claim

possessory rights in respect of the property,

such rights could also be conveyed and there is

no legal bar under any law in transferring the

possessory rights of a person to another willing

person. In that regard it is pertinent to note

that this Court in Ext.P6 judgment dated

16.2.2018 rendered in W.P.(C)No.2871 of 2018 has

dealt with almost in similar case