High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions disposed of with directions to c...

George Thomas v State of Kerala and others; Sethuraman v State of Kerala and others

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) Nos. 3775/2021 and 8435/2021
Neutral Citation:/null

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • N. Nagareesh
Judgment Date
2021-08-12
Court Decision / Holding
Writ petitions disposed of directing the competent authorities under the Land Tax Act to consider the applications P11 (WP(C) 3775) and P8 (WP(C) 8435) and decide thereon within three months, taking into account the judgment in WP(C) No.26069/2020 and the State of Kerala v. Binu Mathew Chacko (DB) decision.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed of with directions to consider and decide on the applications under the Land Tax Act within three months, in light of cited precedents and factual change in land nature.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • George Thomas
  • Sethuraman

Respondents

  • State of Kerala represented by the Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue (WP(C) 3775)
  • Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi
  • Tahsildar, Kanayannur Taluk
  • Village Officer, Elamkulam
  • Greater Cochin Development Authority
  • Agricultural Officer, Krishi Bhavan, Vytila
  • Secretary, Corporation of Kochi (WP(C) 8435)

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Nidhi Sam Johns
  • • Lijo Joseph
  • • A. Kevin Thomas

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Syamathak B.S.
  • • Jimmy George
  • • Pearl K. Davis
  • • Vipin P. Varghese
  • • K. Janardhana Shenoy

Case Synopsis & Summary

George Thomas and Sethuraman, petitioners in WP(C) Nos. 3775/2021 and 8435/2021 respectively, challenge entries in the Basic Tax Register for land described as nilam in Elamkulam, Kadavanthra, Ernakulam. They contend the property was converted long ago and evolved into purayidom; they sought to align records with reality by obtaining additional entries under the Land Tax Act so that the Basic Tax Register reflects the present use, especially since the property was acquired under a housing scheme by a cooperative and later intended for residential construction. The petitioners relied on this Court’s decision in WP(C) No.26069/2020, arguing that a change in land nature warrants updating the register, and submitted Exts. P11 (WP(C) 3775) and P8 (WP(C) 8435) to the Village Officer and Tahsildar, respectively. The Government Pleader opposed, claiming the 26069/2020 judgment is distinguishable. The Court analyzed the issue, noting that the 26069/2020 judgment permits updating the Basic Tax Register to reflect reality when land’s nature changes and that the Division Bench decision in State of Kerala v. Binu Mathew Chacko (2020) 6 KHC 717 (DB) supports this approach. Consequently, the petitions were disposed of directing authorities to consider the applications under the Land Tax Act and decide within three months, after taking into account the cited precedents.

Provisions of Law Cited

Kerala Land Tax Act, 1961

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners argued that a change in the land’s nature from nilam to purayidom and its use under a housing scheme justifies updating the Basic Tax Register to reflect reality. Citing WP(C) No.26069/2020, they contended that the revenue authorities should consider entries (Exts. P11 and P8) to align records with actual use, aided by State of Kerala v. Binu Mathew Chacko (DB) 2020 (6) KHC 717. They urged the Court to direct timely action under the Kerala Land Tax Act.

Contentions of Respondents

The Government Pleader contended that the 26069/2020 judgment is distinguishable and not automatically applicable to the petitioners’ facts. He argued for adherence to statutory procedures and due verification before any alteration of the Basic Tax Register, cautioning against extending relief without proper basis. He pressed for prudent and procedural consideration by revenue authorities.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
WP(C) No.26069/2020WP(C) No.26069/2020PositiveCourt relies on the judgment to support the principle that changes in land nature justify updating the Basic Tax Register.
State of Kerala and others v. Binu Mathew Chacko and others2020(6) KHC 717 (DB)PositiveCited as a supportive precedent aligning with the petitioners’ requested relief.
High Court of Kerala judgment, 2019(5) KHC 8732019(5) KHC 873Mentioned OnlyExhibit P8 referenced; not discussed in detail in judgment reasoning.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against George Thomas v State of Kerala and others; Sethuraman v State of Kerala and others and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **THURSDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2021/21ST SRAVANA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 3775 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **GEORGE THOMAS, AGED 67 YEARS, SON OF K.C. THOMAS, KACHOLAKALA HOUSE, KURUPPAMTHARA, MANJOOR (P.O), PIN – 686603, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. NIDHI SAM JOHNS SRI.LIJO JOSEPH SRI.A.KEVIN THOMAS** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001.** - **2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI, K.B JACOB ROAD, FORT KOCHI - PIN – 682 001.** - **3 THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNOOR TALUK, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682011.** - **4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM - PIN – 682020.** - **5 THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682020, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 2 **R1-R4 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.SYAMANTHAK B.S. R5-BY ADV SRI.JIMMY GEORGE R5-BY PEARL K.DAVIS R5-BY VIPIN P.VARGHESE** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).8435/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 3 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH** **THURSDAY, THE 12[TH] DAY OF AUGUST 2021/21ST SRAVANA, 1943** **WP(C) NO. 8435 OF 2021** ## **PETITIONER:** **SETHURAMAN, S/O. RAMASWAMY, PLOT NO.14, SREERAMA MANDIR, GIRI NAGAR HOUSING COLONY, KADAVANTHRA DESOM, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 020.** **BY ADVS. ARUN THOMAS SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL SMT.KARTHIKA MARIA SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL SMT.DIVYA SARA GEORGE SMT.JAISY ELZA JOE SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW** ## **RESPONDENTS:** **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** - **2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, KOCHI-682 001.** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 4 - **3 THAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE, MARINE DRIVE, KOCHI-682 011.** - **4 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, VYTILLA, KOCHI-682 019.** - **5 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, GANDHI NAGAR, KADAVANTHRA, KOCHI-682 020.** - **6 THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, VYTILLA, KOCHI-682 019.** **R1-R5 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.SYAMANTHAK B.S. R6 BY ADV SHRI.K.JANARDHANA SHENOY, SC R6 BY ADV.SRI.VIPIN P.VARGHESE** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).3775/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 5 ## **JUDGMENT** Dated this the 12[th] day of August, 2021 The petitioners in both the writ petitions hold property, which is described in the Basic Tax Register and revenue records as 'nilam'. The petitioners contend that the property was acquired by a Co-operative Society for the purpose of implementing a Housing Scheme as per Government Order and the said Housing Scheme allowed various persons including the petitioners to construct residential buildings. 2. The petitioners would state that the property in fact was converted long ago and it eventually attained the nature of 'purayidom'. As the petitioners wanted to use the property for other purpose, they submitted representations/ applications to the competent authorities to make entries in the Basic Tax Register. Ext.P11 is the application submitted by the writ petitioner in WP(C) No.3775/2021. Ext.P11 has been submitted to the Village Officer. The petitioner in WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 6 WP(C)No.8435/2021 submitted Ext.P8 application before the Tahsildar. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the issued involved in the writ petition is covered by a judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.26069/2020. 4. The learned Government Pleader however opposed the contentions of the petitioner and submitted that the judgment of this Court in WP(C)No.26069/2020 is distinguishable and will not apply to the facts of the case of the petitioners. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader representing the respondents. 6. This Court in the judgment in WP(C) No.26069/2020 has laid down that when there is a change of the nature of the land, the owners of the land can seek additional entries in the Basic Tax Register so as to make WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 7 the Basic Tax Register in conformity with the reality. The petitioners in WP(C)No.3775/2021 and 8435/2021 submitted Exts.P11 and P8 applications respectively in view of the said Division Bench judgment of this Court. In the circumstances, it is highly necessary that the revenue authorities considers those applications in the light of the Division Bench judgment and the judgment of this Court in WP(C)No.26069/2020 as also the judgment reported in **State of Kerala and others v. Binu Mathew Chacko and others** [2020(6) KHC 717 (DB)]. Accordingly, this writ petitions are disposed of directing the competent authorities under the Land Tax Act to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners and take appropriate decision thereon, taking into consideration, the judgment of this Court in WP(C)No.26069/2020. A decision shall be taken in the matter within a period of three months. **Sd/N. NAGARESH** ncd/14.08.2021 WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 8 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3775/2021** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.C1/1153/81 DATED 04.05.1981 ISSUED BY THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER,TRIVANDRUM TO ERNAKULAM HOUSE CONSTRUCTION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO. E -169.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO. 3281/1984 DATED 19.10.1984 OF ERNAKULAM SRO EXECUTED BY ERNAKULAM HOUSE CONSTRUCTION CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD IN FAVOUR OF SMT. RACHEL THOMAS.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.5075/2003 DATED 28.10.2013 OF ERNAKULAM SRO EXECUTED BY SMT. RACHEL THOMAS.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 09.06.2020 IN RESPECT OF 4.27 ARES IN SURVEY NO.S 434/1-14 AND 436/1-33 IN ELAMKULAM VILLAGE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE THANDAPER ACCOUNT IN RESPECT OF THE SAID HOUSE PLOT COMPRISED IN SY.NO. 434/1 AND SY.NO. 436/1 IN ELAMKULAM VILLAGE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM.** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE LAND IDENTIFICATION DETAILS(DATA BANK) SHOWING THE PROPERTY COMPRISED IN SY.NOS 434/1 AND 436/1 IN ELAMKULAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13.01.2021 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,FORT KOCHI TO THE PETITIONER.** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 9 **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA REPORTED IN (2019(5) KHC 873).** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF DIVISION BENCH OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPORTED IN (2020 (6)KHC 717)** **EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10.11.2020 IN WPC. 20542 OF 2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA.** **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 05.02.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM.** WP(C)Nos.3775 & 8435 of 2021 10 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8435/2021** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER DATED 20.5.2020. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.227/90/1 DATED 26.6.1990 EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER'S FATHER BY THE VENDOR SOCIETY. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 27.1.2005 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH DATED 25.1.2005. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE DATED 19.5.2008. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DATED 8.8.2005. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION DATED 24.3.2021 PREFERRED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM A DATED 25.3.2021 UNDER KERALA LAND TAX ACT, 1961 PREFERRED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO.79/65/HLD DATED 25/01/1965. Exhibit P9(a) TRUE COPY OF THE TYPED COPY OF EXT.P9 GOVERNMENT ORDER. Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 16/04/2021 OBTAINED UNDER THE RTI ACT, 2005 STATING THAT THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER IS INCLUDED IN THE STRUCTURAL PLAN FOR CENTRAL CITY OF KOCHI. Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE WPC.NO.26069/2020 DATED 29/01/2021.**