Madras High Court
K.Palanivel vs Kaveriyammal on 28 July, 2023
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
K.Palanivel .. Appellant in
both W.As.
Vs.
Kaveriyammal .. Respondent-1 in
WA No.1918/23
Lakshmanan .. Respondent-1 in
WA No.1862/23
The District Revenue Officer
Office of the District Revenue Officer
Kallakurichi, Kallakuruchi District.
The Revenue Divisional Officer/
The Sub Collector
Office of the RDO/Sub Collector
Kallakurichi, Kallakurichi District.
The Tahsildar
Chinnasalem Taluk Office
Chinnasalem Respondents 2-4
Kallakurichi. .. in both W.As.
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the common order dated 25.08.2022 made in W.P.Nos.20057 and
11849 of 2021.
For the Appellant : Mr.Balavijayan
in both W.As. For M/s.C.S.Associates
For the Respondents : Mr.R.Nalliyappan
in both W.As. for Respondent-1
Mrs.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
for Respondents 2 to 4
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
Heard Mr.Balavijayan, learned counsel for the appellant,
Mr.R.Nalliyappan, learned counsel for the first respondent and
Mrs.R.Anitha, learned Special Government Pleader for the
respondents 2 to 4.
2. The appellant challenges the order passed by the learned
Single Judge thereby allowing the writ petitions filed by the first
respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
3. The first respondent in both the appeals had filed writ
petition challenging the order passed by the District Revenue Officer.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the learned
Single Judge has proceeded on the basis of the judgment of the civil
Court. However, he did not consider the appeal already filed by the
present appellant, which is pending consideration with the appellate
authority. In view of that, learned Single Judge ought not to have
passed the impugned order.
5. The judgments delivered by the Civil Court are binding on
the revenue authorities. Admittedly, the suit filed by the appellant is
dismissed. The relief claimed by the appellant in the Civil Suit
No.3138 of 2025 for declaration to declare that the property belongs
to him has been negatived. The learned Single Judge has granted
liberty to the appellant to file a fresh application for issuance of
patta if he succeeds in appeal. The remedy of the appellant has
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
been kept in tact by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order.
6. We do not see any error committed by the learned Single
Judge while passing the impugned order.
7. In view of that, the writ appeals are disposed of. There will
be no order as to costs. C.M.P.Nos.16483, 16484 and 16245 of 2023
are closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
28.07.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
To
1. The District Revenue Officer
Office of the District Revenue Officer
Kallakurichi, Kallakuruchi District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer/The Sub Collector
Office of the RDO/Sub Collector
Kallakurichi, Kallakurichi District.
3. The Tahsildar
Chinnasalem Taluk Office
Chinnasalem, Kallakurichi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(kpl)
W.A.Nos.1918 & 1862 of 2023
28.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
