Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Kerala
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

Treesa

High Court Of Kerala|10 December, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This writ petition is filed for the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order staying all further registrations by way of sale or other forms of the 49 ½ cents property in Re- Sy.No.132/7 of Maradu Village involved in SMP.No.73/90 pending before the Land Tribunal, Thripunithura.
(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, directions or commanding the 1st respondent Sub Registrar, Maradu Sub Registrar Office not to carry out any further registrations of sale deed or other deeds of the 49 ½ cents of property in Re.Sy.No.132/7 of Maradu Village, the question of tenancy of which is pending before the Land Tribunal, Thripunithura in SMP.No.73/90 to the final disposal of the same.
2. The purchase certificate was granted to one Cicily. The party respondents have claimed the benefit of that purchase certificate. However, the appellate authority set aside the purchase certificate and remanded the matter back and the matter is pending before the Land Tribunal. In the meanwhile it is apprehending that based on the purchase certificate which was set aside by the appellate authority, the party respondents are attempting to alienate the property, the petitioners approached Registering Authority not to effect the transfer of the property which is subject matter of SMP.No.73/90 before the Land Tribunal. It is submitted by the party respondents that they are not going to effect sale of the property. This submission is recorded. In view of the above, no relief is required from this Court in this matter. The parties are at liberty to approach the civil court to thrash out any other dispute regarding interest over the property. The writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked to restrain a private party from dealing with a property. However, the Registering Authority has to act judiciously while registering a document. This Court in Hamsa v. District Registrar General (2011(3) KLT 64) held that, “it is not duty of the Sub Registrar to register every document presented before him for registration, unmindful of its validity and legality.” Therefore, registering authority has to ensure that party respondents are competent to present the document for registration.
The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, (Judge) Kvs/-
// true copy //
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Treesa

Court

High Court Of Kerala

JudgmentDate
10 December, 2014
Judges
  • A Muhamed Mustaque
Advocates
  • Sri
  • A B Jaleel