MOHAMMEDALI @ BAPPUTTY Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayers in the Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows.

(2.) Heard Sri.Kodoth Pushparajan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.M.R.Dhanil, learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents 1 to 4 .

(3.) According to the petitioner, he is in ownership and possession of 3 acres 76 cents of land in Survey No.416/pt. of Padavayal Village, Mannarkkad Taluk, Palakkad Revenue District as per Ext.P-3 registered sale deed No.486/2006. The said property had originally belonged to one Kuppan Chettiar, who in turn had obtained the same as per Ext.P-1 purchase certificate No.1087/1972 in Suo Moto proceedings initiated under Sec.72 of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963, on the file of the Land Tribunal, Puthur. Then after the death of Kuppan Chettiyar, his legal heirs were in enjoyment and possession of 3.76 acres of land and were paying the Basic Land Tax as per Ext.P-2 tax receipt dated 18.12.2003. The legal heirs of Kuppan Chettiar as per Ext.P-3 registered sale deed No.486/2006, had conveyed an extent of 3.76 acres in the above said survey number to the petitioner. Thereafter mutation was effected in favour of the petitioner and basic land tax was accepted from the petitioner as per Ext.P-4 receipt dated 7.5.2011. Later the 4th respondent Village Officer had refused to accept land tax from the petitioner in respect of the above said property, and insisted the petitioner to produce the prior title documents. The petitioner had made available Ext.P-1 purchase certificate and Ext.P-3 sale deed, as in Ext.P-3 registered sale deed it is clearly stated that the prior title deed is Ext.P-1 purchase certificate. Still the 4th respondent Village Officer had refused to accept basic land tax from the petitioner. The 3rd respondent Tahsildar had filed a statement dated 23.10.2018 through the learned Government Pleader. In paras 3 & 4 of the said statement reads as follows.