Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 921 (KER)

Velukutty v. District Registrar General

2013-10-29

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

body2013
JUDGMENT P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. 1. The issue involved in both these cases is similar and hence dealt with together. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 25241 of 2013 has approached this Court with the following prayers : "i.) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to accept the document to be presented for registration by the petitioner in a portion of the property owned by the petitioner in RS No. 84/2 of Block 90 in Nilambur Village without insisting for production of NOC from the forest officials, And ii) Declare that the respondents are not legally entitled to direct the petitioner to produce NOC from forest officials as pre-requisite for registration of the document to be presented for registration in respect of the land owned by him in RS 84/2 of Block No. 90 in Nilambur Village; and iii) Issue such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to grant. Almost similar prayers have been raised in W.P.(C) No 25266 of 2013, but for the difference in description of the property. 3. The grievance of the petitioners is that there is absolutely no power or authority vested with the respondents to have insisted for production of NOC from the forest department, for having effected the registration of the property concerned in tune with the relevant provisions of the Registration Act. Reliance is also sought to be placed on the decisions rendered by this Court in Selvam v. State of Kerala, 2010 (1) KLT 508 and Karappara Estate v. Sub Registrar and others, 1996 (1) KLJ 198 . The petitioner has also produced some other verdicts of this Court vide Exts. P6 and P7, wherein similar course has been followed placing reliance on the decisions cited supra. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 5. The fact remains is that the relevant provision in the Statute of has undergone a substantial change, whereby Section 71 (3) has been amended in the following terms, w.e.f. 13.09.2013. "71(3). P6 and P7, wherein similar course has been followed placing reliance on the decisions cited supra. 4. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 5. The fact remains is that the relevant provision in the Statute of has undergone a substantial change, whereby Section 71 (3) has been amended in the following terms, w.e.f. 13.09.2013. "71(3). No registering officer shall accept for registration any document involving transfer of property including contract for sale of immovable property belonging to or vested in the Government of Kerala or public sector undertakings operating in the State or local self government institutions unless it is accompanied by a no objection certificate issued by an officer authorised by the State Government in this behalf" By virtue of the amended provision, it is very much obligatory for the parties concerned to have produced NOC issued from the Forest department/Revenue department, as the case may be, so as to cause the registration of the property concerned. In the said circumstances, this Court finds that these writ petitions are not liable to be entertained for the time being. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed.