M.Palanisamy vs The Tahsildar
2021 Latest Caselaw 11824 Mad

                                                                             W.A.No.914 of 2021

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 16.06.2021

                                                         CORAM

                                      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
                                                       and
                                       THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                                 W.A.No.914 of 2021

                     M.Palanisamy                                                   .. Appellant

                                                          Vs

                     1.The Tahsildar,
                       Coimbatore.

                     2.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar,
                       Coimbatore North (02) Taluk,
                       Coimbatore (12) District.

                     3.The District Collector,
                       Coimbatore District.                                    .. Respondents




                               Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the

                     order dated 24.02.2021 made in W.P.No.26687 of 2019.


                               For Appellant         :     Mr.N.A.Nissar Ahmed

                               For Respondents       :     Mr.S.John J.Raja Singh
                                                           Government Counsel




                     Page 1 of 4


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                             W.A.No.914 of 2021



                                                      JUDGMENT

(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

This appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned

Single Judge who, while accepting the contentions of the appellant,

quashed the impugned proceedings of the second respondent and

remitted the matter to the first respondent for fresh enquiry.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that

notwithstanding the civil suit, earlier sale deeds and the proceedings

before this Court, the impugned order was passed. Though it was set

aside, the learned Single Judge was wrong in asking the first

respondent to conduct an enquiry.

3. We do not find any merit in this appeal. The learned Single

Judge quashed the order of the second respondent and directed the

first respondent to look into the matter. Therefore, this is not an

adverse order against the appellant. Obviously, this Court expects the

first respondent to look into the relevant materials including the sale

deeds, the civil court decree and the orders passed by this Court.

Appropriate orders will have to be passed within a period of eight

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.914 of 2021

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment after

affording an opportunity to the appellant.

4. The writ appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

                                                                 (M.M.S., J.)    (R.N.M., J.)
                                                                         16.06.2021
                     Index:Yes/No
                     mmi/ssm

                     To

                     1.The Tahsildar,
                       Coimbatore.

                     2.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar,
                       Coimbatore North (02) Taluk,
                       Coimbatore (12) District.

                     3.The District Collector,
                       Coimbatore District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.914 of 2021

M.M.SUNDRESH, J.

and R.N.MANJULA,J.

mmi

W.A.No.914 of 2021

16.06.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/