Santhakumari vs The Revenue Divisional ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 22644 Mad

                                                                                        W.P.No.24498 of 2021


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 18.11.2021

                                                            CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

                                                    W.P.No.24498 of 2021

                     Santhakumari                                                         ... Petitioner
                                                       Versus
                     1.The Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
                       Arni-632 301,
                       Tiruvannamalai District.

                     2.The Tahsildar/Executive Magistrate,
                       Arni-632 301,
                       Tiruvannamalai District.

                     3.M.Babu                                                    ... Respondents

                     PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     to issue a writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other Writ, directing
                     the 1st respondent to pass appropriate final orders in pursuance to the enquiry
                     report of the Tahsildar R.C.B1/6220/2017, dated 09.02.2019 pending on the
                     file of the 1st respondent.

                                  For Petitioner        :    Mr.R.Karthikeyan
                                  For R1 & R2           :    Mr.A.Damodaran,
                                                             Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                             *****
                                                            ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 1st respondent to pass

appropriate final order in pursuance to the enquiry report of the 2nd

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24498 of 2021

respondent in R.C.B1/6220/2017, dated 09.02.2019.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner

is owner of the property in dispute comprised in T.S.No.21/2 of C7 Block,

Arni measuring to the extent of 270 sq.ft. Earlier, one Mani Naicker had

raised dispute on the ownership of the said property and hence, the

petitioner's father-in-law Natesa Chettiyar has filed a suit in O.S.No.201 of

1981 before the learned District Munsif, Arni and the same was decreed in

his favour on 25.08.1988, as against which, Appeal Suit in A.S.No.26 of

1988 was filed before the learned Subordinate Judge, Arni, which was

dismissed on 25.07.1989, confirming the judgment in O.S.No.201 of 1981.

As against the judgment in A.S.No.26 of 1988, Second Appeal in

S.A.No.1592 of 1989 was filed and the same was also dismissed on

07.12.2002, confirming the concurrent finding of the trial Court and the lower

appellate Court. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent, the son of Mani Naicker

disturbed the possession of the petitioner and attempted to put up

superstructure over the property. Hence, a complaint was lodged before the

Inspector of Police, Arni Town Police Station, Tiruvannamalai by the

petitioner's husband and the same was registered in Crime No.398 of 2017,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24498 of 2021

dated 12.07.2017, which was forwarded to the 2nd respondent to take

appropriate action under Section 145 Cr.P.C. On receipt of the same, the 2nd

respondent invoking Section 145 Cr.P.C., conducted enquiry and passed

preliminary order in M.C.A1.6220/2017, dated 16.10.2017 directing both the

parties not to enter the property in dispute. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent

again conducted a detailed enquiry and the petitioner's husband produced

necessary documents and records in his support. The 2nd respondent vide his

report in R.C.B1/6220/2017, dated 09.02.2019 has categorically stated that

the 3rd respondent encroached the lands belonging to the petitioner's husband

and referred the matter to the 1st respondent for passing appropriate final

order under Section 145 Cr.P.C. In the meantime, the petitioner's husband

died on 24.12.2019 leaving behind his son as legal heirs. Thereafter, the

petitioner's son gave representation to the 1st respondent to pass final order,

but it was not considered. Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks

direction of this Court to the 1st respondent to pass appropriate order.

3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the

respondents 1 and 2 submitted that despite several reminders, the 1 st

respondent not passed final order so far in pursuance to the enquiry report of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24498 of 2021

the 2nd respondent.

4.Considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the

petitioner and in view of the limited prayer sought for by the petitioner, this

Court directs the 1st respondent to complete the proceedings and pass final

order based on the report submitted by the 2nd respondent in

R.C.B1/6220/2017, dated 09.02.2019, within a period of three months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No

costs.

18.11.2021 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

vv2

To

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Arni, Tiruvannamalai District-632 301.

2.The Tahsildar/Executive Magistrate,

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24498 of 2021

Arni, Tiruvannamalai District-632 301.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.24498 of 2021

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

vv2

W.P.No.24498 of 2021

18.11.2021

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