MANOJ K.ISSAC Vs. TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is seeking for a direction to effect mutation in respect of the property devolved on him. The item of property settled in his favour as per Ext.P2 is having an extent of 3.64 ares in survey No.212/19. It is after execution of the document, he applied for mutation. The objection with regard to the acceptance of the application was that there was revenue recovery proceedings against the petitioner's father.

(2.) IN Ext.P3 letter, the said information has been conveyed to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the property against which revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated has no connection with the property covered by Ext.P2. Revenue recovery proceedings have been initiated for default committed by the father of the petitioner and the property therein is covered by sale deed No.3737/73 of Arookkutty Sub Registry. Ext.P4 is the copy of the said sale deed.

(3.) IN the above case, this court was of the view that there is no bar in effecting mutation even if revenue recovery proceedings are pending. Paragraph 7 of Ext.P5 judgment is extracted below for easy reference.