Madras High Court
Dindigul Ever Silver Brass vs The District Revenue Officer on 7 August, 2024
Author: P.T.Asha
Bench: P.T.Asha
W.P.(MD) No.18215 of 2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 07.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA
W.P.(MD).No.18215 of 2015
and
M.P(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2015
Dindigul Ever Silver Brass,
Aluminum and Plastic Vessels,
Manufacturers & Sellers Welfare Association,
Represented by its present President Srikanth. .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Dindigul District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Dindigul.
3.The Tahsildar,
Dindigul East Taluk,
Dindigul District.
4.Selvarajan
5.Ganesan .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
_________
Page 1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.18215 of 2015
records pertaining to impugned order of the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.
6979/2012/Aa5, dated 12.07.2013 and the consequential order of the 1st
respondent made in Pa.Mu.No.22585/2013/Aa4, dated 24.08.2015 and
quash the same as illegal, consequently to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to
restore the sub-divisions carried in S.No. 477/1 at Adiyanuthu Village,
Dindigul taluk and not to alter the Patta in Patta No.5390 in the name of
the petitioner in respect of survey No.477/12, situated at Adiyanuthu
Village, Dindigul Taluk to a total extent of 3775 Sq.Feets.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkatesh
For R1 – R3 : Mr.B.Saravanan
Additional Government Pleader
For R4 : Mr.V.Perumal
For R5 : No Appearance
ORDER
The present writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned
order passed by the 2nd respondent and the consequential order of the 1st
respondent, dated 24.08.2015 and to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to
restore the sub-divisions carried in S.No. 477/1 at Adiyanuthu Village,
Dindigul taluk and not to alter the Patta in Patta No.5390 standing in the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
name of the petitioner in respect of survey No.477/12, situated at
Adiyanuthu Village, Dindigul Taluk to a total extent of 3775 Sq.Feets.
2. The facts which gives rise to this writ petition is briefly set out
herein below:
(i) The petitioners had purchased an extent of 3775 square feet in
Survey No.477/1 under a registered sale deed, dated 06.03.2009 at
Adiyanuthu Village, Dindigul Taluk from one Mohan Raj. The petitioner
would submit that even prior to the purchase by them, the extent
purchased by the petitioner had been subdivided as Survey No.477/12
and patta had been issued in favour of the 5th respondent as early as on
01.08.2001. From the 5th respondent, the petitioner’s vendor Mohan Raj
had purchased the same on 19.09.2001. After the petitioner had
purchased the property, he had been granted patta in Patta No.5390. The
petitioner has been in possession and enjoyment of the lands since from
the date of his purchase.
(ii) Meanwhile, it appears that the 4th respondent had filed a suit in
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.No.555 of 2004 on the file of the Principal District Court, Dindigul
for the relief of a declaration and permanent injunction in respect of an
extent of 20 ¾ cents in Survey No.477/1 situated in the western side of
the survey number out of an extent of 1 acre 25 cents. This suit has been
filed against the 5th respondent and 13 others. Though the petitioner and
his vendor Mohan Raj had purchased the property even prior to the
institution of the suit, they had not been made parties to the above suit.
This suit came to be dismissed on 03.09.2010, against which, an appeal
in A.S.No.111 of 2010 had been filed by the 4th respondent before the
Principal Sub Court, Dindigul and the same was decreed in favour of the
4th respondent on 23.07.2012. Though the 4th respondent had taken steps
to implead the petitioner as a party in the appeal, the same was dismissed
by an order, dated 26.09.2011 and challenging the decree in A.S.No.111
of 2010, the 5th respondent had filed S.A(MD)No.486 of 2013.
(iii) After the decree in A.S.No.111 of 2010, the 4th respondent had
made an application on 03.08.2012 to the 2nd respondent to grant patta in
his name to an extent of 9047 square feet in Survey No.477/1. Once
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
again, the 4th respondent had only shown the 5th respondent as a party. By
an order, dated 12.07.2013, the 2nd respondent had cancelled the sub
divisions 478/8 to 477/12 and directed the 3rd respondent to issue patta in
favour of the 4th respondent to an extent of 20 and ¾ cents. The petitioner
would submit that the property purchased by the 5 th respondent is on the
eastern portion of Survey No.477/1 measuring an extent of 2 acres and
50 cents, whereas the 4th respondent had purchased from out of an extent
of 1 acre 25 cents on the western side. The 2nd respondent when passing
the impugned order, had stated that the patta has been wrongly granted to
the 5th respondent in the portion purchased by the 4th respondent. Since
the order has been passed without notice to the petitioner, the petitioner
has preferred the writ petition.
3. Heard the learned counsels on either side and no counter has
been filed on behalf of the respondents
4. It is now brought to the notice of the Court that the second
appeal preferred by the 5th respondent and others in S.A(MD)No.486 of
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2013 was allowed by a judgment, dated 03.03.2023 and the judgment and
decree passed in A.S.No.111 of 2010 on the file of the Principal Sub
Court, Dindigul in favour of the 4th respondent has been set aside. The
second respondent in his impugned order had stated that since the second
appeal is pending, orders could not be passed in the revision. Since
S.A(MD)No.486 of 2013 has been disposed, there is no impediment for
the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner. In view of the
same, the impugned orders, dated 12.07.2013 and 24.08.2015 are set
aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the 1st respondent. The
1st respondent is directed consider the case of the petitioner afresh and
pass orders within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
07.08.2024
NCC : Yes/No
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
gbg
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Dindigul District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Dindigul.
3.The Tahsildar,
Dindigul East Taluk,
Dindigul District.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
P.T.ASHA, J.
gbg
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
07.08.2024
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
