P.K.Riyas v. Sub Registrar Ullyil, Village Officer Chavasseri, Village Officer Kolari, and Kariyath Pookkootty

WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 1 # **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN** **MONDAY, THE 8[TH] DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 19TH CHAITHRA, 1946** **WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **P.K.RIYAS AGED 39 YEARS S/O. ABDUL KHADER, AGED 39 YEARS, BUSINESS, NABEESA MANZIL, VILAKKODE P.O, IRITTY (VIA), IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS. SRI.K.V.PAVITHRAN SRI.JAYANANDAN MADAYI PUTHIYAVEETTIL SRI.NIAS MOOPAN SRI.P.SAJU SRI.E.M.UNNIKRISHNAN MANJERI** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** - **1 THE SUB REGISTRAR ULIYIL P.O, IRITTY, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT** - **2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER CHAVASSERI VILLAGE P.O, CHAVASSERI, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.** - **3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER KOLARI, P.O, MATTANNUR, IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT.** WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 2 **4 THE KARIYATH POOKKOOTTY AGED 50 YEARS S/O. ASSAN HAJI (LATE) AGED 50 YEARS, KARIYATH HOUSE, NO OCCUPATION, CHAVASSERI AMSOM, AND DESOM, CHAVASSERI P.O, PIN -670702.** ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 3 # **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J** **--------------------------------------W.P.(C.) No. 37517 of 2016** **-------------------------------------Dated this the 8[th] day of April, 2024** ## **JUDGMENT** ## The above writ petition is filed with following prayers : (i) “Issue a writ of certiorari or such other writ or direction quashing the original of the Ext. P3 cancellation deed. (ii) Issue a writ of Mandamus or such other writ or direction commanding the 2[nd] and 3[rd] respondents to accept the land revenue for the properties covered by Ext.P1 gift deed from the donees in Ext.P1. (iii) Grant such other writ or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.” [sic] 2. The 4[th] respondent herein is the youngest among the 11 children of Assainar-Mariyam couples. He is unmarried, is WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 4 the submission. Since he has no wife and children, he settled his properties to his brothers and sisters and the children of his deceased siblings. He did so by executing and registering a gift deed dated 10.4.2007 as evident by Ext.P1. It is submitted that the possession of the original gift deed proved acceptance of gift deed. It is also submitted that in the gift deed itself, the handing over of the property to the donees is specifically stated. The petitioner is the 2[nd] son of Kadar (Full name Abdulkhader) donee No.3 in the gift deed. Kadar died and on the death of Kadar, his undivided right in the properties described in Ext.P1 got vested to his children including the petitioner, is the submission. Thus the petitioner is the co-owner of the properties described in. It is submitted that the donees in Ext.P1 have been keeping possession of the properties and enjoying the same absolutely as co-owners. While so, the petitioner on behalf of the co-owners of the WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 5 properties, approached the 2[nd] respondent to remit land revenue in the name of the Kariyath Nabeesu and others. When the petitioner tendered the required amount towards the land revenue, the 2[nd] respondent refused to accept the same. On enquiry, the petitioner came to know that there is a cancellation deed executed by the 4[th] respondent which is registered as far as Ext.P1 gift deed is concerned. Ext.P2 is the declaration given by the 2[nd] respondent. The stand of the 3[rd] respondent is also similar as regards the acceptance of the land revenue because of the properties of Kolari village covered by Ext.P1. After issuance of Ext.P2, the petitioner approached the Sub Registrar's office, Uliyil and made search for the cancellation deed and obtained the same. Ext.P3 is the cancellation deed obtained by the petitioner through one Suresh Kumar. After obtaining the copy of the cancellation deed, the petitioner could understand that the 4[th] respondent WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 6 executed the cancellation deed purporting to cancel Ext.P1 gift deed. The contention of the petitioner is that the cancellation deed is illegal because it is a unilateral cancellation of the gift deed which is accepted by the donee. It is submitted that since the property covered by Ext.P1 gift deed was handed over to the donee, the only way to cancel the document is by filing suit before the competent civil court. It is further submitted that a gift deed under which the title of the donor is transferred to the donees cannot be cancelled unilaterally and without approaching the civil court. Hence, it is submitted Ext.P3 deed is of no legal consequence. Hence, this writ petition is filed. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Even though notice is issued to the 4[th] respondent, there is no appearance for the 4[th] respondent. That shows that the 4[th] respondent is accepting WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 7 the contentions raised in this writ petition. 4. It is stated in the writ petition that as per Ext.P1 gift deed, the gift is accepted by the donees and property is also delivered to the donees as evident from the recital in Ext.P1. If that is the case, the gift is complete. This point is considered by the Apex Court in **Daulat Singh Dead through Lrs.** v. **State of Rajasthan** [(2021) 3 SCC 459]. In **Pavakkal Noble John and Another v. Kerala State and Others** [2010 (3) KHC 879], this Court observed that unilateral cancellation of document is not permissible. The relevant portion of the above judgment is extracted hereunder : “16. …............. a cancellation deed of a sale deed can be registered only with the consent of both the original seller and the buyer and not unilaterally by the seller alone. For this reason also the registration of a cancellation deed unilaterally cancelling a sale deed by the seller, without the consent of the purchaser, is to be refused by the Sub-Registrar.” 5. In the light of the same, I think Ext.P2 has no validity WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 8 and it can be ignored by the petitioner and donees. Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions : - 1) It is declared that Ext.P3 cancellation deed of Ext.P1 gift deed is void ab initio because it is a unilateral cancellation by the donor after the gift deed is accepted and the property is delivered to the donees. - 2) The 2[nd] and 3[rd] respondents are directed to accept land revenue for the properties covered by Ext.P1 gift deed from the donees in Ext.P1 in accordance with law ignoring Ext.P3 cancellation deed. **Sd/P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** SKS WP(C) NO. 37517 OF 2016 9 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37517/2016** **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED DATED 10.4.2007 AND REGISTERED A DOCUMENT NO.1343 OF 2007 AT SRO ULIYIL, BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P2** **TRUE COPY OF THE DECLARATION DATED 7.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE CANCELLATION DEED DATED 18.10.2016 OF SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE ULIYIL.**