SURMI N Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOLLAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner submits that by Ext.P1, she purchased a property exclusively belonging to the fourth respondent. It is stated that for the reason that there is revenue recovery proceedings pending against the fourth respondent's husband, the property purchased by her is not mutated. It is complaining of the above, the writ petition is filed.

(2.) If as stated by the petitioner, revenue recovery proceedings are pending against the husband of the fourth respondent and the property conveyed by Ext.P1 is that of the fourth respondent, the pendency of the revenue recovery proceedings cannot be a justification for declining mutation as applied for by the petitioner.

(3.) Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, directing respondents 2 and 3 to pass orders on the application made by the petitioner for mutation of her property in the light of the above.