AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T.R. Ravi, J
Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.
The petitioners have challenged Ext.P8 order whereby mutation has been denied on the ground that proceedings under the Revenue Recovery Act have been initiated for realisation of loan. Petitioners rely on the judgment of this Court in Thulasibhai Vs. State of Kerala [2010 (4) KLT 215] wherein this Court has categorically held that the pendency of revenue recovery proceedings cannot be a ground to deny the request for mutation, since mutation cannot have any impact on either the revenue recovery proceedings or the title of the purchaser. I do not find any reason to take a different view.
In the above circumstances, the writ petition is allowed. Ext.P8 is quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to reconsider the issue and effect mutation in favour of the petitioners, if the application is otherwise in order. Pendency of revenue recovery proceedings shall not be a reason to deny mutation. It is made clear that this Court is not making any observation regarding the merits of the claim of the petitioners.