Madras High Court
Kuzhipirai Pottramari Kulam Trust vs The District Revenue Officer on 4 March, 2024
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.P(MD)No.25477 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.03.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.25477 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.21654 and 21655 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.21 of 2024
Kuzhipirai Pottramari Kulam Trust,
Represented by its Trustee,
K.Annamalai, S/o.Karuppiah,
19, Thiru.V.Ka.Street,
Thilagar Nagar, Karaikudi,
Sivagangai District. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Pudukkottai District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Pudukkottai.
3.The Tahsildar,
Thirumayam Taluk,
Pudukkottai District.
4 Alagappan
5.Rajamanikkam ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P(MD)No.25477 of 2023
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records of the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings
No.Ni.Mu.A4/0064/2021 dated 08.01.2021 and quash the same and
consequently directing the respondents No.2 and 3 to restore the patta in the
name of the petitioner in S.No.431/1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of Kuzhipirai Village,
Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District within a time stipulated by this
Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.RM.Arun Swaminathan
For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj,
Spl. Government Pleader for R1 to R3.
Mr.K.K.Kannan for R4 & R5.
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2.The petitioner challenges the order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the
Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukottai for mutating the petition mentioned
survey numbers in favour of Thiruvalluvar Marriage Hall represented by its
current Administrator (Ulaganayagi Amabal Kovil). The stand of the petitioner
is that the petitioner / trust had earlier filed O.S.No.83 of 2004 on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Thirumayam and obtained a decree of declaration and
permanent injunction on 12.09.2006. The defendants filed A.S.No.50 of 2009
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
before the Sub Court, Pudukottai. But the same was dismissed on 22.11.2010.
This decree had become final. The petitioner's contention is that the revenue
record cannot run counter to the Civil Court's judgment and decree. Finding
prima facie merit in the said contention, I had also granted interim order of stay
on 19.10.2023. To vacate the same, the private respondents filed
W.M.P.(MD)No.21 of 2024.
3.The learned counsel for the private respondents points out that in the
civil suit filed by the writ petitioner, they were not made as parties. It is
pointed out that in the civil suit, the State of Tamil Nadu represented by the
District Collector, Pudukottai should have been shown as defendant. But then,
the District Collector was not even made as party. My attention is drawn to the
decree. The decree schedule relates to Old Survey Nos.396/1, 396/2 and 370.
They correspond to Survey Nos.431/1, 431/2, 431/4, 431/5 and 431/6. But the
impugned order pertains to S. No.431/3. I do not find S.No.431/3 in the decree.
The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the subject matter of impugned
order is also covered in the civil suit. It is a factual aspect. The petitioner of
course was not put on notice before the impugned order was passed. I am
therefore of the view that this should be gone into. If S.No.431/3 is covered in
the suit decree, I would have set aside the impugned order. Since S.No.431/3 is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
not found in the decree, I am constrained to keep the impugned proceedings on
hold. The parties will appear before the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Pudukottai on 18.03.2024 at 03.00 pm. The petitioner and the private
respondents herein will not receive any fresh notice. It is open to both of them
to place materials before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Pudukottai in support
of their respective contentions. Based on the same, the Revenue Divisional
Officer, Pudukottai will pass order afresh on merits and in accordance with law.
The impugned order will abide by the order to be passed by the Revenue
Divisional Officer, Pudukottai. Such an order shall be passed by the second
respondent within a period of six weeks thereafter. I make it clear that I have
not gone into the merits of the matter.
4.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
04.03.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
ias
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To:
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Pudukkottai District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Pudukkottai.
3.The Tahsildar,
Thirumayam Taluk,
Pudukkottai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
ias
04.03.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
