Court sets aside order transferring Travancore maharaja's land

MADURAI: The Madurai bench of the Madras high court on Tuesday set aside an order of the district revenue officer (DRO) of Tirunelveli declining to cancel the transfer of patta of a land that stood in the name of the maharaja of Travancore to the name of Damodhara Pandiyan in Tirunelveli, who was appointed by the former to look after his property, and thereafter to the government of Kerala. The court also remitted the matter to the DRO to consider the matter afresh on merits.

The erstwhile maharaja of Travancore purchased two palaces - Travancore house and Courtallam palace - in 1882 and 1886 at Courtallam village in Senkottai taluk of Tirunelveli district.

The Tenkasi tahsildar issued a patta in the maharaja's name in 1973. Subsequently, it was transferred to Pandiyan and thereafter to the Kerala government without the notice of the maharaja.

To cancel the patta, the maharaja gave a petition to the DRO who rejected his request on February 26, 2010 and said he had no rightful claim over the property in question. The officer also opined that it was a fit case to be referred to the Tamil Nadu government to take possession of the bungalow and the land covering an extent of 56.68 acres.

Aggrieved over the DRO's order, Sri Padmanabha Dasa Uthradom Thirunal H H Marthanda Varma filed a case before the high court bench in 2013. After his demise the same year, his children Parvathi Devivarma and Padmanabha Varma became parties to the case in 2014.

Subsequently, a member of the Travancore royal family, Moolam Thirunal Ramavarma, filed a petition in 2015 against the DRO's order. All of them sought to quash the DRO's order and to restore the land in the name of the maharaja of Travancore.

The Kerala government filed a counter saying the chief secretary to the government of Travancore, Kochi sent a letter to the private secretary of the maharaja on March 9, 1951, as per which certain properties were retained by the Maharaja. Accordingly, Travancore House was retained by the maharaja and Courtallam palace was handed over the Kerala government. It further said the DRO's order was liable to be set aside insofar as recommendation to the Tamil Nadu government to take possession of the land is concerned. The Tamil Nadu government said the patta was legally transferred.

After hearing both sides, Justice K K Sasidharan set aside the DRO's order and remitted the matter to the DRO to consider the matter afresh on merits.

The judge said, "It is really strange to note that the patta of the property was transferred from master to servant without any indication. There was no effort by the DRO to identify the property with reference to its survey numbers and boundaries. The DRO acted beyond his brief by declaring that the property should go to Tamil Nadu."