Madras High Court
R.Dhanapal vs The Collector on 18 June, 2021
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017 and
W.M.P. No. 27333 of 2017
R.Dhanapal ... Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Collector,
Office of the Collector of Tiruvallur District,
Tiruvallur.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Gandhi Salai, Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
3. The Revenue Inspector,
Tirutani Taluk, Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
4. The Tahsildar,
Office of the Tahsildar,
Tirutani Taluk, Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
5. The Village Administrative Officer (VAO),
Vyasapuram Post,
Ganeshapuram Village, Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District - 631 210.
1/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
6. N.Chandrasekar
7. N.Pandurangan
8. Narayanasamy ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the
respondents 1 to 5 to issue computerized Patta in petitioner's favour in
respect of the scheduled mentioned properties of Dry lands measuring
62 cents situated in Survey Nos.223/9, 223/12 and 223/14 in
Ganasapuram Village, Vyasapuram, Tiruttani Taluk and Post,
Thiruvallur District, after holding enquiry against 6th to 8th respondents.
For Petitioner : No appearance
For Respondents : Mr.Richardson Wilson
Counsel for Govt. for R1 to R5
Mr.Nissar Ahmed
for M/s D.Ashok Kumar for R6
ORDER
The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus directing
the respondents 1 to 5 to issue computerized Patta in petitioner's favour
in respect of the scheduled mentioned properties of Dry lands measuring
62 cents situated in Survey Nos.223/9, 223/12 and 223/14 in
Ganasapuram Village, Vyasapuram, Tiruttani Taluk, Thiruvallur District,
after holding enquiry against 6th to 8th respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
2. The properties in question is landed properties in Survey
Nos.223/9, 223/12 and 223/14 in Ganasapuram Village, Vyasapuram,
Tiruttani Taluk, Thiruvallur District.
3. In respect of these three properties, the petitioner seeks for
issuance of Patta in favour of the petitioner and the said request,
according to the petitioner since has not been considered, he has
approached this Court by filing the present Writ Petition with the
aforesaid prayer.
4. When the case is taken up for hearing, there is no representation
for the petitioner, however, Mr.Richardson Wilson, learned counsel for
the Government appearing for the official respondents and Mr.Nissar
Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent made
submissions on the merits of the case. After hearing the case, this Court
feels that, this Writ Petition can be disposed of on merits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
5. The subject lands according to the petitioner belongs to the
petitioner and only on that strength, he claimed Patta in his favour.
6. However, it is the case of the private respondents that, the
subject properties with some other properties belong to one Ponnammal
and during the life time of Ponnammal, she executed a Will in respect of
the said properties to and in favour of sixth to eight respondents herein.
7. Despite the said Will executed in favour of the private
respondents, through which, they inherited the properties in question,
there has been some trouble between the private respondents and the
petitioner, hence the private respondents were triggered to file a Suit in
O.S. No. 162 of 2012 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Tiruttani
seeking a judgment for declaratory decree in favour of the plaintiffs, who
are the private respondents herein, as against the Writ Petitioner and
another, who were the defendants in the Suit, in respect of various
properties in three survey numbers mentioned herein above.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
8. The Suit after contest was decreed by the District Munsif Court
on 09.09.2016, where, the following relief has been granted:
"14. In the result this suit is partly decreed
declaring the plaintiffs right and title of the suit
schedule mentioned properties in Survey Nos.223/9,
223/12 and 223/14, 223/29 and 223/37 and
granting to permanent injunction restraining the
defendants their, men, agents and servants from any
manner interfering with the plaintiffs peaceful
possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule
mentioned Survey Nos.223/9, 223/12, 223/14,
223/29 and 223/37 and the suit is dismissed in
respect of suit schedule mentioned Survey
Nos.223/46 and 223/47. In view of the facts and
circumstances of the case, no cost is awarded."
9. Subsequently, pursuant to the Will executed in favour of the
private respondents followed by the Civil Court decree as referred above,
the ownership of the properties in question has been confirmed in favour
of the private respondents, on that strength, they seems to have obtained
Patta from the Revenue Authorities in their favour. However, as against
the said move, the petitioner had approached the Revenue Authorities to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
get Patta for the said lands in three survey numbers referred to above in
favour of the petitioner and that is why, the present Writ Petition has
been filed with the aforesaid prayer.
10. Mr.Richardson Wilson, learned counsel for the Government
appearing for the official respondents by relying upon the averments
made in the counter affidavit on behalf of the official respondents 1 to 5
would submit that, the properties in question with some other properties
belong to one Ponnammal and this is evident from the revenue records
and the said Ponnammal executed the Will in favour of the private
respondents and based on the Will executed in favour of them, they could
have enjoyed the properties. However, since some trouble arose, they
approached the Civil Court and got a decree as stated above. Therefore,
the ownership of the lands in question in favour of the private
respondents 6 to 8 since has been confirmed by the declaratory decree
issued by the Competent Civil Court, as against which, since there is no
further appeal filed by the petitioner, that declaration has become final.
Therefore, based on which, only the private respondents can claim
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
ownership of the properties and they are only entitled to get Patta.
Therefore, the plea raised by the petitioner to get Patta in his name in
respect of the three survey numbers of the properties in question cannot
be entertained by the Revenue Authorities. Therefore, this Writ Petition
is liable to be rejected, he contended.
11. Taking the similar line, Mr.Nissar Ahmed, learned counsel
appearing for the sixth respondent also made submissions that, he also
seeks for dismissal of this Writ Petition.
12. I have considered the said submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the materials placed
before this Court.
13. As has been rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the
Government appearing for the official respondents as endorsed by the
learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent, as per the records, the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
lands in question originally belong to one Ponnammal, who executed the
Will in favour of the private respondents, on the strength of the Will as
well as the other documents, the private respondents filed the Civil Suit
for a declaratory decree as against the petitioner herein and another
person, who stood as defendants in the Suit and the Suit was decreed as
stated supra.
14. In the operative portion of the judgment and decree,
S.Nos.223/9, 223/12, 223/14, 223/29 and 223/37 have been mentioned,
as if the Suit has been decreed in favour of the private respondents,
therefore, out of five survey numbers, since three Survey Nos.223/9
223/12 and 223/14 also covered, which are the subject matter in this Writ
Petition, for which alone, the petitioner seeks Patta in favour of him,
therefore, absolutely, the petitioner does not have any right to seek Patta
in his favour. Therefore, the said plea raised before the Revenue
Authorities, as has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the
Government, need not be considered, as it has been established through
the Civil Court decree that the petitioner is not the owner of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
properties in question, but the private respondents are the owners.
Therefore, the petitioner has no locus to seek for any indulgence of this
Court, i.e., a direction to the Revenue Authorities to issue patta for the
said properties.
15. In that view of the matter, the plea raised by the petitioner
cannot be countenanced. Therefore, the Writ Petition fails and
accordingly, it is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
18.06.2021
vji
Index: Yes/No
Speaking Order: Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
To
1. The Collector,
Office of the Collector of Tiruvallur District,
Tiruvallur.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Gandhi Salai, Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
3. The Revenue Inspector,
Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
4. The Tahsildar,
Office of the Tahsildar,
Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur - 631 209.
5. The Village Administrative Officer (VAO),
Vyasapuram Post,
Ganeshapuram Village,
Tirutani Taluk,
Thiruvallur District - 631 210.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
vji
W.P. No. 25893 of 2017
and
W.M.P. No. 27333 of 2017
18.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
