LALI YOHANNAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

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

(2.) Heard Smt.Sreedevi Kylasanath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) The petitioner is the widow of one James, So.Late Kunjamma. In the wedlock of the petitioner with James, a daughter by name Juliet James has been born. The petitioner's husband James had died on 3.10.2003. During the lifetime of James, his mother Kunjamma had executed Annexure 1 Settlement Deed No.20032002 of SRO, Anchal whereby she had settled certain properties in favour of her son the abovesaid James. Annexure -1 Settlement Deed was registered on 28.6.2002 before the SRO, Anchal. During the lifetime of James, the petitioner was in ownership, enjoyment and possession of said property covered by the said settlement deed No.20032002 and after his death the petitioner being the widow of James was in ownership and enjoyment of the said property. Later the petitioner decided to execute a settlement deed so as to settle the said property in favour of her daughter Juliet James. The said settlement deed executed by the petitioner in favour of her daughter Juliet James was presented before the 4th respondent Sub Registrar, SRO, Anchal. Thereupon the petitioner was appraised that the said settlement deed cannot be registered by the 4th respondent on the ground that after the execution of Annexure 1 Settlement Deed No.20032002 of SRO, Anchal by the said Kunjamma in favour of her son, the same was cancelled. That Kunjamma, the mother of James had executed Annexure 2 cancellation deed no.26482005 of SRO, Anchal whereby Annexure 1 settlement deed was said to be cancelled. Further it has also been informed that the said Kunjamma, without reciting about Annexure 2 cancellation deed, had later executed and got registered yet another cancellation deed No.3972011 of SRO, Anchal purporting to cancel Annexure 1 settlement deed given in favour of James earlier. Copy of the said cancellation deed No.3972011 has been produced as Annexure 3. Annexures 1 to 3 has been produced along with memo dated 27.11.2018 by the learned Senior Government Pleader in compliance with this Court's order dated 22.11.2018. The objections raised by the 4th respondent SRO in refusing to register the settlement deed executed by the petitioner in favour of her daughter Juliet James are contained in Ext.P-3 memo. Later the petitioner had approached the 3rd respondent District Registrar (General) praying for direction to the 4th respondent SRO to register the settlement deed executed by her in favour of her daughter. The 3rd respondent District Registrar had issued Ext.P-4 communication dated 14.9.2018 intimating the petitioner about the factum of cancellation deeds as in Annexures 2 and 3 and also requesting the petitioner to file her objections before the 4th respondent SRO as against Ext.P-3 memo issued by the 4th respondent etc. Thereafter the petitioner had submitted Ext.P-5 written submissionsobjections before the 4th respondent SRO as against the Ext.P-3 memo. In thelight of these aspects the petitioner had filed the instant Writ Petition with the aforementioned prayers.