SULAIMANKUNJU Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner states that by a settlement deed executed on 25.4.1983, property having an extent of 2.83 Ares in Old Sy. No.6371/1 of West Kallada Village was settled in his name by his father. After assignment of a portion of the properties, he is now in possession of 5.25 Ares. Four shop rooms are also situated in the said property. According to the petitioner, after resurvey, certain errors crept into the revenue records and the extent of the property in the possession of the petitioner got diminished to 1.28 Ares (3.25 cents). In the said circumstances, the petitioner herein is stated to have lodged a complaint to measure out his property and on its strength, Ext.P8 notice was issued by the Taluk Surveyor. Though the petitioner handed over the entire records to the Taluk Surveyor, he has not proceeded to measure out and demarcate the properties. He contends that while so, the petitioner was informed by the 4th respondent that he has encroached upon portions of the Karalimukku - Valanjavaramburoad and certain marking stones were laid. Being aggrieved a complaint was lodged before the 4th respondent. The said authority forwarded the complaint to the 3rd respondent for demarcating the property. However, without waiting for the measurement to be completed, the petitioner was informed that the encroachments would be removed by force. He contends that immediately thereafter, Ext.P11 notice was issued calling upon the petitioner to remove the encroachment within 15 days. Being aggrieved, the petitioner is before this Court.

(2.) Smt. Bhanu Thilak, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has not encroached upon any road puramboke and according to her Ext.P11 notice was issued without properly demarcating the property. She would contend that if the property is measured based on the title deed of the petitioner and the old Survey records, the bona fides of the assertions made by the petitioner will be revealed. She states that the application filed by the petitioner before the authorities for measuring the property is pending and if Exhibit P11 is implemented during its pendency, gross injustice will be caused to the petitioner.

(3.) The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that Exhibit P11 was issued after proper measurement and it was revealed that the petitioner had encroached upon portions of the road puramboke. However since the matter is pending before the Taluk Surveyor and in view of the pendency of Exhibits P13 and P14, the property shall be measured yet again by the Taluk Surveyor in the presence of the petitioner, as well as the respondent Nos 3 & 4 in the light of Exhibit P1 settlement deed and the old survey records. Only after measurement as aforesaid shall action be taken against the petitioner, if it is found that he has encroached upon portions of the puramboke land.