AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 320 wordsT.R. Ravi, J
Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents.
The grievance of the petitioner is that mutation with regard to his property is not being effected for the reason that the property devolved on him through an unregistered Will.
The Government Pleader on instructions submits that since the Will is unregistered, mutation will be effected after hearing the party, other legal heirs and witnesses to the Will. The petitioner relies on Ext.P4 judgment of this Court, in which this Court has held that right claimed by the petitioner therein cannot be disputed by the Registrar particularly since a Will is a document which is not compulsorily registrable. The Court further held that if there is any dispute as regards the Will, that has to be sorted out in a Civil Court. I do not find any reason to take a different view.
The respondents 3 & 4 are not expected to conduct an enquiry into the validity of the Will, after examining the witnesses to the Will and hearing other legal representatives. It is trite law that mutation or acceptance of land tax by itself will not amount to a declaration of title of the person in whose name the mutation is effected or in whose name the tax is accepted, since the purpose of effecting mutation is only fiscal in nature.
In such circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. There will be a direction to respondents 3 & 4 to accept land tax from the petitioner for the property referred to in Ext.P1 Will after effecting mutation. It is made clear that any dispute regarding the Will or the ownership of the petitioner will have to be decided in a properly instituted civil suit at the instance of the person who raises the dispute. Necessary orders shall be issued within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.