Madras High Court
Tharan Sri Sakthi vs V.Sudhakaran on 15 April, 2021
W.A.No.662 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.04.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.A.No.662 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.3461 of 2021
1.Tharan Sri Sakthi
2.Jai Gugan .. Appellants
Vs
1.V.Sudhakaran
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Coimbatore - 18.
3.The Tahsildar,
Mettupalayam Taluk,
Coimbatore District.
4.The Inspector of Police,
Anti Land Grabbing Special Wing,
O/o Superintendent of Police,
Coimbatore - 18. .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 14.02.2020 passed in W.P.No.18608 of 2013.
Page 1 of 5
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.662 of 2021
For Appellants : Mr.S.Sairaman
For Respondents : Mr.V.Kadhirvelu
Special Government Pleader
for R2 to R4
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
This appeal has been directed against the order of the learned
single Judge, who after taking note of the conclusion of the
proceedings inter se parties with respect to the title, was pleased to
allow the writ petition as prayed for.
2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that
the first respondent/writ petitioner ought to have invoked the
statutory remedy available instead of approaching this Court.
Incidentally, it is submitted that the unnumbered Special Leave
Petition is still pending with the diary number.
3.Learned single Judge is perfectly right in holding that the
revenue authorities are duty bound to follow the decree granted by
the Court. While it is trite that the civil Court is not bound by the
patta issued by the revenue official, being any document of title, such
an official is bound by the decree. As on today, there is a title in
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.662 of 2021
favour of the first respondent/writ petitioner. The decree granted in
O.S.No.288 of 1995 stands against the appellants. The judgment of
the trial Court has been restored by allowing the second appeals on
contest in S.A.Nos.2122 and 2123 of 2001 dated 01.11.2018. Though
the Special Leave Petition is stated to have been filed as stated
supra, the learned single Judge held that there is no proof to
substantiate the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants
to the effect that the case is still pending at the diary number stage.
4.In such view of the matter, we do not find any error in the
order passed by the learned single Judge. However, we make it clear
that any order that could be passed by the official respondents
restoring all the revenue entries prior to the passing of the impugned
order would certainly be subject to the orders if any that would be
passed by the Apex Court. We are also rejecting the contention of the
learned counsel for the appellants that the first respondent/writ
petitioner ought to have exhausted the appeal remedy as law does
not prohibit the exercise of power under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.662 of 2021
5.In view of the above, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(M.M.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
15.04.2021
Index:Yes/No
mmi
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Coimbatore - 18.
2.The Tahsildar,
Mettupalayam Taluk,
Coimbatore District.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Anti Land Grabbing Special Wing,
O/o Superintendent of Police,
Coimbatore - 18.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.No.662 of 2021
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and
R.N.MANJULA,J.
mmi
W.A.No.662 of 2021
15.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
