Madras High Court
P.K.Madesh vs The District Legal Services Authority on 20 June, 2025
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.30880 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.30880 of 2024
P.K.Madesh .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Legal Services Authority
Rep.by its Chairman
ADR Building, Combined Court Campus
Dharmapuri-636 705.
2.The District Registrar
Dharmapuri district Registration Office
1st Floor, Salai Vinayagar Koil Road
Dharmapuri-636 701.
3.The Sub Registrar
Sub Registrar's Office
Karagathahalli
Palacode-636 808.
4.The Tahsildar
Tahsildar Officer
Palacode-636 808.
5.P.M.Raja
6.R.nandhini
7.R.Siva
8.K.Rajkumar
9.T.G.Periyannan
10.K.Santhi
11.R.Ilango .. Respondents
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
W.P.No.30880 of 2024
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the Impugned
Award passed by the 1st Respondent in Lok Adalat Case No.72 of 2023 in OS.No.248 of
2023 dated 14/10/2023 on the file of Subordinate Court, Palacode and quash the
same and consequently, direct the respondents 2 and 3 to cancel the settlement Deeds
executed in Doc. Nos. 1236 and 1237 of 2024 both dated 12/03/2024 and the 4th
respondent to remove the names of the private respondents from the Revenue records
of the subject properties in S.No.520 521 /1 522 /2 524/1 at Eranhalli vllage palacode
Taluk Dharmapuri Dstrict, all made based on the impugned Award.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathia Chandran
For Respondents : Mr.E.Vijay Anand
Additional Government Pleader
for R1 & R4
Mr.Stalin Abimanyu
Additional Government Pleader
for R2 & R3
Mr.R.Selvakumar for R5 to R11
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the award passed by the 1st
respondent in Lok Adalat Case No.72 of 2023 in OS.No.248 of 2023 dated 14/10/2023
on the file of the Sub Court, Palacode and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd
respondents to cancel the settlement deeds executed on 12.03.2024 and remove the
names of the private respondents from the revenue records.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
2.The case of the petitioner is that the paternal uncle of the petitioner was an
agreement holder for the subject property. Even before the sale deed was executed, he
passed away. Thereafter, the sale deed was executed in favour of one Muthammal and
Salammal. They executed a Sale Deed dated 24.02.1960 in favour of the petitioner's
father when he was a minor, Pachaiyappan and Mariappan. Ultimately, the petitioner's
father was in possession and enjoyment of the property settled in his favour by
Muthammal and Salammal from the year 1960 onwards under Document No.309 of
1960.
3.The further case of the petitioner is that his father passed away leaving behind
the petitioner, four sisters and the mother and they were in possession and enjoyment
of the property. In the year 2013, the legal heir of Pachaiyappan and Mariappan along
with the sisters of the petitioner executed power of attorney document in favour of
certain third parties even with respect to the subject property and on the strength of
the said power of attorney document, a sale deed dated 25.07.2012, came to be
executed in respect of a portion of the property. On coming to know of the said
alienation, the petitioner and his mother filed suit in O.S.No.85 of 2013, before the
District Munsif Court, Palacode, seeking for the relief of declaration and permanent
injunction against all the legal heirs of Pachaiyappan, Mariappan and Kandhasamy and
also the subsequent purchaser.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
4.In the year 2023, a third party was attempting to put up construction and on
enquiry, it came to light that a portion of the property has been sold in his favour
through a sale deed registered as Document No.2056 of 2021 and questioning the
same OS.No.111 of 2023 was filed by the petitioner for the relief of declaration and
permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Palacode and the said suit is
pending. In order to have more clarity in dealing with the properties, the petitioner and
his mother and sisters filed a suit for partition in OS.No.208 of 2023, before the
Additional District and Sessions Court, Dharmapuri. They have also sought for the
cancellation of sale deeds executed in favour of the 14th defendant. This suit is also
pending.
5.The petitioner came to know that the 6th respondent filed a suit in OS.No.248
of 2023, before the Sub Court, Palacode against the 5th respondent seeking for the
relief of specific performance. On 14.10.2023, both the 5th and 6th respondents
appeared before the Lok Adalat and settled the matter, wherein the 5th respondent
agreed to execute the sale deed in favour of the 6th respondent, failing which the 6th
respondent can get the sale deed executed through Court.
6.The 6th respondent instead of getting the sale deed executed in her favour,
managed to execute settlement deeds in favour of the 5th and 7th respondents who are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
none other than the father and brother of the 6th respondent. In turn, the 5th and 7th
respondents sold the property to the respondents 8 to 11.
7.The present writ petition has been filed questioning the award passed in OS.
No.248 of 2023 on the ground that it vitiated by fraud and it arose out of a collusive suit
between the father and daughter.
8.Heard Mr.S.Sathia Chandran, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.E.Vijay
Anand, learned Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R4, Mr.Stalin Abimanyu, learned
Additional Government Pleader for R2 & R3 and Mr.R.Selvakumar, learned counsel for
R5 to R11.
9.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Lok Adalat Award can
be questioned only by filing a writ petition and there is no other alternative remedy
available to the petitioner. He further submitted that the 5th and 6th respondents filed
the suit and managed to get a Lok Adalat Award only to defeat the rights of the
petitoner and others and more so when already suits are pending before the concerned
Courts. It was further submitted that the private respondents taking advantage of the
Lok Adalat award have created further documents and they are creating more
alienations to defeat the rights of the petitioner and others.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
10.Per contra, the learned counssel for the private respondents submitted that
the petitoner do not have any right over the subject proeprty and therefore, the
petitioner cannot question the Lok Adalat Award.
11.From the narration of facts, it is quite evident that the parties are already at
loggerheads and atleast two suits are pending touching upon the same property. The
Lok Adalat Award which has been questioned will not bind any of the other parties
except the 5th and 6th respondents who are none other than father and daughter. It
will always be open to the petitioner and others to raise the issue that the Lok Adalat
Award will not bind them and that it was more in the nature of a collusive award to deal
with the subject property. This Court does not want to go into the merits of the award
passed since the 5th and 6th respondents are denying the right of the petitioner and
others in the subject property. That has to be tested considering the manner in which
the suit was filed and it ended with a Lok Adalat Award. Surprisingly, the award
provided for execution of a sale deed in favour of the 6th respondent by the 5th
respondent but however settlement deeds have been executed by the 6th respondent
in favour of 5th and 7th respondents. It is not very clear as to how the 6th respondent
executed settlement deeds even without the execution of a sale deed in favour of the
6th respondent. Hence, tenability of the award passed in the Lok Adalat can always be
questioned in the pending proceedings and admittedly the suit was filed and the Lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
Adalat Award was passed during the pending of the earlier two suits in OS.No.85 of
2023, before the District Munsif Court, Palacode and in OS.No.208 of 2023, before the
Additional District and Sessions Court, Dharmapuri.
12.Insofar as OS.No.85 of 2032, it is at the stage of service of notice on the
defendants. In OS.No.208 of 2023, it is at the stage of filing written statement.
Obviously, the Lok Adalat award that arose out of the proceedings between the 5th and
6th respondents, will not have any bearing in the pending suits and it can be
independently questioned and decided in those suits. The Civil Court before which the
suits are pending can decide on the tenability of the Lok Adalat Award during the
pendency of the suits where the same properties are involved. In the light of this
clarity given by this Court, the petitoner and others who are agitating the suits before
the Civil Court can raise all the grounds including the tenability of the award passed by
the Lok Adalat. The same will be considered on its own merits and in accordance with
law.
13.In order to stop any futher alienation and creation of third party rights, there
shall be an order of injunction restraining the private respondents not to alienate the
subject properties pending the suits. There shall be a direction to the learned Principle
District and Sessions Court, Dharmapuri to transfer to its file the suit pending in
OS.No.85 of 2013, before the District Munsifc Court, Palacode and it can be decided
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
along with OS.No.208 of 2023, since the same properties are involved and it is inter
connected. If two Courts are parallely going to deal with the suits, it may lead to
contradictory judgments and multiplicity of proceedings. There shall be a direction to
the learned Principle District and Sessions Judge, Dharmapuri, to dispose of the suits in
OS.No.208 of 2023, along with OS.No.85 of 2013, within a period of nine (9) months
from the date of receipt of copy of the order.
14.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.
20.06.2025
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
kp
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
To
1.The District Legal Services Authority
Rep.by its Chairman
ADR Building
Combined Court Campus
Dharmapuri-636 705.
2.The District Registrar
Dharmapuri district Registration Office
1st Floor, Salai Vinayagar Koil Road
Dharmapuri-636 701.
3.The Sub Registrar
Sub Registrar's Office
Karagathahalli
Palacode-636 808.
4.The Tahsildar
Tahsildar Officer
Palacode-636 808.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
kp
20.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 24/06/2025 06:47:45 pm )
