Madras High Court
N.Tamilarasan vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 17 October, 2023
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 17.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
and
WMP(MD)No.5904 of 2017
N.Tamilarasan ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Vadipatti Taluk,
Vadipatti,
Madurai District.
3.Ramanathan
4.R.Ramachandran ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorari
to call for the records relating to the impugned order vide
Ni.Mu.No.3745/2014/N dated 25.08.2014 passed by the 1st
respondent and quash the same.
For petitioner : Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj
For Respondent : Mr.G.Suriya Anandh,
Nos.1 and 2 Additional Government Pleader
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed as against the order
of the Revenue Divisional Officer under the Patta Pass Book
Act on 25.08.2014.
2.Vide the order impugned, the RDO has cancelled the
patta, which stood in the name of the petitioner and
directed the Tahsildar to issue patta in favour of the
respondents 3 and 4.
3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that
respondents 3 and 4 have also filed a suit before the VI
Additional District Munsif Court, Madurai in OS.No.149 of
2014 for the relief of declaration on the subject property
as against this petitioner along with other subsequent
purchasers and obtained an interim order. They have also
sold the property to one Senthilkumar and that suit was
dismissed by the trial Court by its judgment and decree
dated 26.02.2019. As against the judgment and decree the
respondents 3 and 4 have not preferred any appeal. However,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
the newly impleaded purchaser has filed an appeal before
this Court in A.S(MD)No.128 of 2019 and the same is
pending. The learned Counsel further submits that there is
no interim order in the appeal suit.
4.The learned Counsel for the respondents 3 and 4
submits that they have also sold the property to 3rd party
and they are not having any interest in the property.
5.This Court considered the rival submissions and
perused the materials placed on record.
6.The patta for the subject lands initially stood in
the name of the petitioner and in the appeal filed by the
respondents 3 and 4, the RDO has cancelled the patta, which
stood in the name of the petitioner and also granted patta
in favour of the respondents 3 and 4. This order is
impugned in this writ petition. Pending this writ petition,
the respondents 3 and 4 have also filed a suit as against
the petitioner for the relief of declaration on the subject
property, where they have lost the suit. Pending the suit,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
they have also sold the property to one Senthilkumar and he
has filed an appeal suit before this Court. Thereafter they
have not prosecuted it, since they have already sold the
property to one Senthil Kumar.
7.In view of the above this writ petition is allowed.
The impguned order is set aside. The matter is remitted to
the 1st respondent RDO to conduct enquiry by issuing notice
to the said Senthil Kumar and other interested parties if
any and take a decision keeping in mind the above mentioned
judgment and decree passed by the civil Court. No costs.
Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.10.2023
dsk
To
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Vadipatti Taluk,
Vadipatti,
Madurai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk
WP(MD)No.15390 of 2014
17.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
