Madras High Court
S.Manoharan vs C.Arumugam ...1St on 5 October, 2023
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.1965 and 7687 of 2021
W.A(MD)No.465 of 2021
S.Manoharan ... Appellant/3rd Party
Vs.
1.C.Arumugam ...1st Respondent/Petitioner
2.The Commissioner,
Madurai Corporation, Madurai-2.
3.The Assistant Commissioner,
Region-I,
Madurai Corporation, Madurai-2 ... Respondents 2&3/Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set aside
the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.19395 of 2020, dated 27.01.2021 on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
For R1 : Mr.A.Ramkumar
For R2 & R3 : Mr.S.Vinayak, Standing Counsel
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
W.A(MD)No.1219 of 2023
C.Arumugam ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Madurai Corporation,
Madurai-2.
2.The Assistant Commissioner,
North Region-II,
Madurai Corporation, Madurai-2
3.The Assistant Revenue Officer,
North Zone-II,
Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
4.The Bill Collector,
Ward No.24,
Madurai Corporation, Madurai.
5.Manoharan
6.Sathiyamoorthy ... Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set aside
the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.8038 of 2023, dated 01.06.2023 on the file of
this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.V.M.Jegadeesha Pandian
For R1 to R4 : Mr.K.K.Kannan,
Standing Counsel
2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
W.A.(MD)No.465 of 2021 has been instituted challenging the order
dated 27.01.2021 passed in W.P.(MD)No.19395 of 2020. W.A.(MD)No.1219 of
2023 has been instituted, questioning the validity of the order dated 01.06.2023
passed in W.P.(MD)No.8038 of 2023.
2.One Manoharan / appellant in W.A.(MD)No.465 of 2021 mainly
contended that the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.19395 of 2020 was based on
mislead facts and the appellant has not been impleaded as party respondents in the
said Writ Petition. By suppressing the fact that there is no dispute with reference
to the subject property comprised in T.S.No.6 to an extent of 48.5 cents situated at
Ward No.6, West Region 1, Kulamangalam Main Road, Madurai North Taluk,
Madurai District, the 1st respondent Arumugam secured an order from this Court
for the purpose of assessment of property tax from the hands of the Corporation.
The order caused infringement of the civil right of the appellant and therefore, the
appellant has chosen to file third party Writ Appeal.
3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
3.This Court granted leave and when the matter is taken up for final
hearing, the learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the Writ
Petition itself has been filed without providing information about the dispute of
civil in nature existing between the appellant and the contesting respondent. In
the event of implementing the order, the rights of the appellant will be prejudiced
and more so, civil suits are pending between the parties.
4.We find prima facie reason to interfere, in view of the fact that the said
Arumugam filed Writ Petition and projected before the learned Single Judge as if
there is no dispute in respect of the subject property and therefore, the assessment
of vacant land tax is to be made by the competent authority of Madurai
Corporation. Believing the words of the said Arumugam, this Court directed the
authorities to assess vacant land tax in respect of the subject property.
5.We find that the Writ Petition itself is untenable, since it was filed
without impleading necessary parties and by suppressing the fact that there is no
rival claim. In fact, the civil suit was instituted and it was dismissed for default
subsequently, restored and posted for evidence.
4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
6.The 1st respondent Arumugam filed another Writ Petition in
W.P.(MD)No.20700 of 2018, challenging the validity of the rejection order passed
by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.
7.Filing Writ Petitions suppressing the vital facts is directly in violation
of the High Court Writ Rules. Necessary parties have not been impleaded for
effective adjudication of the issues. Admittedly, the civil suits are pending
between the parties. That being the factum, the order passed by this Court in the
Writ Petition is to be recalled, since it was passed based on the false representation
made by the 1st respondent Arumugam. Accordingly, the order dated 27.01.2021
passed in W.P.(MD)No.19395 of 2020 is set aside. Therefore, W.A.(MD)No.465
of 2021 is allowed.
8.As far as W.A.(MD)No.1219 of 2023 is concerned, the Writ Petition
filed by the said Arumugam was dismissed on the ground that W.A.(MD)No.465
of 2021 was pending and the said Writ Appeal was instituted between the parties.
That being the factum, the order dated 01.06.2023 passed in W.P.(MD)No.8038 of
2023 stands confirmed. Accordingly, W.A.(MD)No.1219 of 2023 stands
5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
dismissed. The parties are at liberty to redress their grievances before the
competent civil Court of law, wherein the suits are pending. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(S.M.S., J.) & (V.L.N., J.)
05.10.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Yuva
6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Yuva
W.A.(MD)Nos.465 of 2021 and 1219 of 2023
05.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
