P.N.Ravindran, J.
This appeal arises from the decree and judgment passed by the Court of the Principal Subordinate Judge of Kochi in O.S. No. 229 of 1988. The appellants are the defendants in the suit. By the impugned decree and judgment the suit was decreed as prayed for. During the pendency of this appeal, pursuant to the orders passed by this Court on 12.2.2013 and 4.10.2013, a meeting was held in the presence of the Honourable the Chief Minister and the Revenue Minister and at that meeting it was agreed that on the plaintiff paying the sum of Rs.77.753 lakhs to the Government as fair value, the Government will transfer the entire plaint schedule property to the plaintiff. Thereafter also various orders were passed by this Court. Ultimately, the Government issued G.O.(Ms) No.176/14/RD dated 30.4.2014, whereby, Government accorded sanction for the assignment of the plaint schedule property (32 cents of land comprised in Survey Nos.158 and 159 of Mattancherry Village, Kochi Taluk, Ernakulam District) to the plaintiff by realising fair value of the land which was fixed at Rs.77.753 lakhs, by invoking the powers vested with the Government as per rule 21(ii) of the Assignment of Land within Municipal and Corporation Area Rules, 1995, subject to the condition that there will be no exemption from payment of stamp duty. By that order, the Government also authorised the District Collector, Ernakulam, to take further necessary action.
2. It is not in dispute that pursuant thereto, the District Collector, Ernakulam has, as per proceedings No. L1-43102/2014 dated 7.11.2014, ordered assignment of the aforesaid parcel of land, unconditionally, to the plaintiff. Thereupon, patta No.S3.18524/1988 dated 7.11.2014 was also issued to the plaintiff. The originals of the aforesaid proceedings dated 7.11.2014 as also the patta have been produced by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/plaintiff along with photostat copies thereof, as per list of documents dated 13.11.2014. We have compared the originals of the proceedings dated 7.11.2014 and the patta, referred to above, with the photostat copies produced by the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff. The copies tally with the originals thereof.
3. In such circumstances, as the dispute has been settled out of court and the Government have assigned the plaint schedule property to the plaintiff, the impugned decree and judgment are set aside and the appeal is disposed of, recording the fact that pursuant to the decision of the State Government the very same plaint schedule property has been assigned to the plaintiff as per proceedings dated 7.11.2014 issued by the District Collector, Ernakulam, and original of the patta number S3.18524/1988 dated 7.11.2014. A copy each of the proceedings dated 7.11.2014 and the patta, referred to above, shall be appended to this judgment. The Registry shall return to the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/plaintiff the originals of the proceedings dated 7.11.2014 issued by the District Collector, Ernakulam, as also the original of the patta after retaining photostat copies produced along with the memo dated 13.11.2014 filed by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/plaintiff. We also clarify that though the plaintiff had remitted the stamp duty payable and had initially sought for a refund of the stamp duty on the ground that no conveyance is being effected and the land is being assigned on payment of fair value, later plaintiff's counsel submitted that the plaintiff is not pressing its claim for refund of the amount remitted by way of stamp duty.
Sd/- P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.
Sd/-
P.B. SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.
//True Copy// P.A. to Judge jjj