ABDUL MAJEED Vs. SHAREEFA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondents 8 to 13 in W.P. (C) No. 19431 of 2013 are aggrieved by the interim order dated 23rd October, 2013 passed by the learned Single Judge. Respondents 1 to 4 in the Writ Appeal are the writ petitioners. Hereinafter, the parties are referred to, as per their rank in the Writ Petition. The writ petitioners claim title and possession in respect of an extent of 99 cents in Survey No. 651/8A, 651/8B and 651/8C of Thrikkakara North Village. Respondents 1 to 7 in the Writ Petition are the State of Kerala and the officials of the Revenue and Police Department and Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau. Respondents 8 to 13, who are the party respondents are the contesting parties. Respondents 14 to 17 are Revenue officials. Respondent No. 18 is the Gunman (now under suspension) of the Chief Minister of Kerala, against whom various allegations have been made. Respondent No. 19 is the wife of respondent No. 18. Respondent No. 19 was working in Survey Department and she was transferred to the office of the Commissioner of Land Revenue on 17.1.2012 and she joined duty on 17.2.2012. Allegations are also made against her. Respondent No. 20 is a private party who does not claim any right in the property. Respondent No. 21 is the Director of Central Bureau of Investigation.

(2.) The writ petitioners traced their title to the property as follows: The property was outstanding in the possession of Thekkesamooha Madom in Jenmom right in 1088 M.E., Lakshmana Ayyer of Thekkesamooha Madom granted a lease of the property in favour of Ahammed Pareeth. In 1103 M.E., Kunjan Marakkar, son of Ahammed Pareeth got a renewal of the lease from Lakshmana Ayyer. The jenmom right of the property was transferred by the jenmy to Aliyar Kunju as per document No. 1064 of 1102 M.E. A partition took place in the family of Aliyar Kunju in the year 1114 M.E. and the property in question was allotted to Hamsa Koya, son of Aliyar Kunju, who sold his rights in the property to Muhammed, son of Kunjan Marakkar, as per sale deed No. 1186 of 1957 (Ext. P1). Even before that Kunj an Marakkar had attorned to Hamsa Koya and the lease was renewed in favour of Kunjan Marakkar as per document No. 2335 of 1116 M.E. In the year 1960, Muhammed, son of Kunjan Marakkar sold the property to his brother Kadar Pillai. Kadar Pillai is the husband of writ petitioner No. 1 and father of the other writ petitioners. Out of the extent of 1.16 acres, which Kadar Pillai got as per the sale deed of 1960, he transferred an extent of 49 cents to his wife, the first petitioner as per document No. 872 of 1960. Kadar Pillai died in 1980 and the properties were partitioned among his legal representatives, as per document No. 362 of 1982. It is also alleged that mutation was effected as per the allotment made in the partition deed and the subsequent transfers made as between the legal representatives of Kadar Pillai. The writ petitioners stated that the original Thandaper numbers were 8826 and 8597 and after the mutation effected as per the partition deed of 1982, the Thandaper number was changed as T.P. No. 9074. It is also stated that after re-survey, the Thandaper number is 2127 and later, the Thandaper was changed as 9365 of 9367 on the basis of the partition deed and subsequent transfers.

(3.) Respondents 8 and 10 to 13 in the Writ Petition filed O.S. No. 617 of 2007 on the file of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ernakulam against the writ petitioners to cancel partition deed No. 362 of 1982. According to the writ petitioners, the plaintiffs in O.S. No. 617 of 2007, in collusion and connivance with respondents 18, 19 and 20 presented fabricated documents before the civil court. On the basis of a complaint filed by the writ petitioners, Crime No. 1003 of 2007 was registered at Kalamassery Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 469 and 471 read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code, it is seen from the counter affidavit filed by respondent No. 4 that final report was filed on 9.1.2009 in Crime No. 1003 of 2007.