Madras High Court
N.Manjunath vs The District Collector on 7 September, 2023
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.09.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
W.A.No.1889 of 2023
N.Manjunath .. Appellant
Vs.
1. The District Collector
Collectorate
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
2. The District Revenue Officer
Collectorate
Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Office of the Sub Collector
Denkanikotta Road, Hosur.
4. The Tahsildar
Taluk Office
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
5. The Director
Directorate of Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor, C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
Page 1 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
6. The Member Secretary
Hosur New Town Development Committee
District Town Planning Office
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
7. Harish
8. Prabhu .. Respondents
W.A.No.1890 of 2023
B.Subramani .. Appellant
Vs.
1. The Director
Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor
C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
2. The Joint Director
Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor
C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
3. The Assistant Director
District Town and Country Planning
No.25/2, Nethaji Road
Hosur 635 109.
4. The Commissioner
Municipal Corporation
Hosur 635 109.
5. G.R.Anand Babu
6. V.Ramachandra Babu
7. A.Harish
8. P.Usha .. Respondents
Page 2 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
W.A.No.1895 of 2023
N.Manjunath .. Appellant
Vs.
1. The Commissioner
Hosur City Municipal Corporation
Bangalur Road, Opposite to Thillai Nagar
Hosur 635 109.
2. The Director
Directorate of Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor
C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
3. The Deputy Director
Krishnagiri District Town and Country Planning Office
No.25/2, Nethaji Road
Hosur 635 109.
4. G.R.Anand Babu
5. Harish
6. Prabhu .. Respondents
Prayer: Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
common order dated 21.06.2023 made in W.P.Nos.32474 & 33786 of
2022 and 716 of 2023.
For the Appellants : Mr.Ravi Kumar Paul
Senior Counsel
For M/s. Paul and Paul
Page 3 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
For the Respondents : W.A.No.1889 of 2023
Mrs.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
for Respondents 1 to 5
Mr.T.Balaji for Respondent-6
Mr.M.S.Krishnan
Senior Counsel
For Mr.R.Sagadevan
for Respondents 7 & 8
W.A.No.1890 of 2023
Mrs.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
for Respondents 1 to 3
Mr.T.Balaji for Respondent-4
Mr.M.S.Krishnan
Senior Counsel
For Mr.R.Sagadevan
for Respondents 5, 7 & 8
W.A.No.1895 of 2023
Mr.T.Balaji for Respondent-1
Mrs.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
for Respondents 2 & 3
Mr.M.S.Krishnan
Senior Counsel
For Mr.R.Sagadevan
for Respondents 4 to 6
Page 4 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
We have heard Mr.Ravi Kumar Paul, learned Senior Counsel for
M/s. Paul and Paul, for the appellants, Mrs.R.Anitha, learned Special
Government Pleader for the official respondents, Mr.T.Balaji, learned
counsel for Municipal Corporation and Mr.M.S.Krishnan, learned
Senior Counsel for Mr.R.Sagadevan, learned counsel for the private
respondents.
2. The appellants had filed writ petitions before the learned
Single Judge basically seeking to cancel the layout approval granted
in favour of the private respondents, so also assailing the report of
the Tahsildar dated 05.05.2022.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellants strenuously
contends that in fact, it is only in a writ petition under Article 226 of
the Constitution, the appellants would have assailed the
contradictory reports by the Tahsildar. The same person who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
officiated as Tahsildar has given two contradictory reports.
4. In the report dated 12.02.2022, he had held that
Tmt.Vinodha purchased the lands in S.Nos.345/1A2, 345/1A3 and
345/1C vide document No.2606/2002. Thereafter, she has executed
the Settlement Deed in favour of her son Manjunath in
S.Nos.345/1A2, 345/1A3, 345/1AC, 345/1D and 345/1E, totalling
five survey numbers, showing the said document No.2606/2002
and the upgraded scheme A Register patta No.33 as previous
documents. Though Tmt.Vinodha purchased the lands in only three
survey numbers 345/1A2, 345/1A3 and 345/1AC, the Settlement
Deed was registered in all the survey numbers erroneously.
5. Whereas the same Tahsildar again gave a report on
05.05.2022, holding that as per the document No.2606/2002,
Tmt.Vinodha had not purchased anything and no patta is issued in
patta No.33 through the Revenue Department to the said Vinodha,
as Patta No.33 was in the name of one Kurappa.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
6. According to learned Senior Counsel, the learned Single
Judge ought to have gone into the veracity of the reports and
arrived at a conclusion. They are the documents of the revenue
officials. The learned Single Judge ought not to have relegated the
appellants to seek relief in the pending civil suits.
7. It appears that the appellants had raised an objection to
the application for approval of layout and the layout is sanctioned in
favour of the private respondents and the same is sought to be
assailed in the writ petitions.
8. It would also appear that prior to the filing of the present
writ petitions, the appellants had filed civil suits before the District
Court bearing O.S.Nos.66 of 2022 and 72 of 2022. The appellants
had claimed declaration of their title and also challenged the sale
deed executed in favour of the private respondents with
consequential relief of injunction. The suits are still pending. The
sanction of layout has to be in favour of the owner of the property.
The dispute with regard to title is sub judice before the civil Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
The appellants have also sought injunction. The plaintiffs in the suit
are not precluded from claiming further consequential reliefs of not
changing the nature of the property or alienation or such other
consequential relief considering the facts and circumstances of the
case.
9. It is for the appellants to seek reliefs in the pending suits.
The learned Single Judge has also observed that when the dispute
of title is pending before Civil Court, the appellants are at liberty to
file Interlocutory Applications and direction is also given to decide
the Interlocutory Applications within the stipulated period. In view
of the pendency of the civil suits, it would not be appropriate to give
any finding, even prima facie in respect of title qua the properties.
The same would be preempting the decision of the civil suits. In a
writ appeal, the said disputed question of title cannot be gone into.
10. As far as the contention of learned Senior Counsel for the
appellants that two contradictory reports are given by the Tahsildar,
certainly, before the Civil Court, the records can be called for and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
the facts established.
11. In view of the pendency of the civil suits before the
competent Civil Court, the learned Single Judge has not committed
any error in relegating the appellants for appropriate relief before
the Civil Court.
12. The writ appeals accordingly stand disposed of. There will
be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.16351, 16353,
16350, 16352, 16367 and 16368 of 2023 are closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
07.09.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kpl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
To
1. The District Collector
Collectorate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
2. The District Revenue Officer
Collectorate, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Office of the Sub Collector
Denkanikotta Road, Hosur.
4. The Tahsildar
Taluk Office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
5. The Director
Directorate of Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor, C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
6. The Member Secretary
Hosur New Town Development Committee
District Town Planning Office
Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
7. The Joint Director
Town and Country Planning
2nd, 3rd and 4th Floor, C & E Market Road
Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107.
8. The Assistant Director
District Town and Country Planning
No.25/2, Nethaji Road, Hosur 635 109.
9. The Commissioner
Municipal Corporation
Hosur 635 109.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
10.The Commissioner
Hosur City Municipal Corporation
Bangalur Road, Opposite to Thillai Nagar
Hosur 635 109.
11.The Deputy Director
Krishnagiri District Town and Country Planning Office
No.25/2, Nethaji Road
Hosur 635 109.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(kpl)
W.A.Nos.1889, 1890 & 1895 of 2023
07.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
