User:Pvsankarraja
Main Search Forums Advanced Search Disclaimer Cites 12 docs - [View All] Article 226 in The Constitution Of India 1949 The Tripura Land Revenue And Land Reforms Act, 1960 No. 43 Of 1960 The Tamil Nadu Legislative Council (Abolition) Act, 1986. The Registration Act, 1908 Article 21 in The Constitution Of India 1949
Madras High Court
Auetaa Morai Industrial Estate ... vs The Collector on 20 February, 2013
DATED : 20.02.2013
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU
W.P.Nos.7849, 16896 and 28536 of 2010,
4378, 7282, 13591 and 14679 of 2011, 1846, 1880,
17877, 17957, 22708 and 30554 of 2012
and Auetaa Morai Industrial Estate ... vs The Collector on 20 February, 2013 Showing the contexts in which TIRUVALLUR appears in the document Change context size Current Commissioner of Police, Chennai Suburban Police Headquarters, St.Thomas Mound, Chennai-600 016. .. Respondents W.P.No.13591 of 2011 : E.P.Dasaratha Naidu .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Avadi, Chennai. 2.K.R.Sarada .. Respondents W.P.No.14679 of 2011 : N.Rajeshkumar .. Petitioner Vs. The Sub Registrar, O/o.The Sub Registrar, Avadi, Chennai-600 055. .. Respondents W.P.Nos.1846 and 1880 of 2012 : A.Ramesh .. Petitioner in W.P.No.1846 of 2012 M.Paramasivam .. Petitioner in W.P.No.1880 of 2012 Vs. The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District Chennai-600 053. .. Respondent in both petitions W.P.No.17957 of 2012 : P.Mohan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Inspector General of Registration, The Inspector General of Registration Office, No.100, Santhome Highway, Pattinambakkan, Chennai-600 028. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, No.27,Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001. 3.The Sub Registrar, Avadi Sub Registrar Office, Avadi Municipality Old Building, Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents W.P.No.17877 of 2012 : J.Samundaeswari .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur. 2.The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District, Chennai-600 053. 3.The Sub Registrar, Avadi Sub Registration
Office, Thiruvallur District. 4.The Inspector of Police, T-7, Avadi Tank Factory Police Station, Avadi, Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents W.P.No.22708 of 2012 : J.V.D.Durai .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep by its Revenue Secretary, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 3.The District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Thiruvallur. 4.The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District. 5.M/s.Vel Tech Group of Institutions, rep by its Founder & Chairman, Mr.R.Rangarajan, Santhi Sudha, No.38, Old No.24, ABM Avenue, R.A.Puram, Chennai-28. 5.The Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Chennai. .. Respondents W.P.No.30554 of 2012 : K.S.Saradha .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai-600 028. 2.The Collector, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur Collectorate, Thiruvallur. 3.The Inspector General of Police (North Zone), Alandur, Chennai-600 016. 4.The Sub Registrar, Avadi, Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents W.P.No.7849 of 2010 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to order for survey
preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the third respondent to register the petitioner land situated at old No.39, new no.5, Morai village, Balaji Nagar to third party on considering the petitioner's representation, dated 04.07.2012. W.P.No.22708 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1to 4 to remove the encroachments in S.No.294/2, 3, 4 and 5 in Morai village, Tiruvallur District and restore and protect the same as Government Grazing ground poramboke. W.P.No.30554 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent comprised in Order No.Ka.No.50362/R3/10, dated 30.8.2010 and the consequential order in No.Ka.No.50362/R3/10 dated 19.11.2010 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and consequently direct the 4th respondent to accept and register the documents peresented by the petitioner insofar as it relates
M.P.Nos.1,1,2 of 2010, 1,1, and 2 of 2011, 1,1,2, 2 and 3 of 2012
W.P.No.7849 of 2010 :
AUETAA Morai Industrial Estate Association,
represented by its Secretary,
Mr.K.S.Subramaniam,
Door No.8, 16th Cross Street,
Indira Nagar, Adyar,
Chennai-600 020. .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvalur-602 001
Tamil Nadu.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Ambattur, Chennai. .. Respondents
W.P.No.16896 of 2010 :
S.Bhuvaneswaran,
The Secretary,
Veerapuram New Colony Welfare Association
(Regd.No.124/90)
No.4,Kamarajar Salai,
Vasantha Nagar,
Kolathur,
Chennai-600 099.
Thiruvallur District. .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State rep. By
1.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
3.The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Chennai-600 053.
4.The Registrar,
Registrar Office,
No.120,Santhome High Road,
Chennai-600 028.
5.The Sub-Registrar,
Avadi Sub Registrar Office,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
6.The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai Suburban Police Headquarters,
St. Thomas Mount, Chennai-600 016.
7.The Inspector of Police,
T-7, Tank Factory Police Station,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
8.The Superintendent,
The Central Bureau Investigation (Corruption Wing),
3rd Floor, Haddows Road,
Chennai-600 006.
9.The Police Superintendent,
The Central Bureau Investigation,
Special Crime Branch,
'A' Wing, 3rd Floor, Rajaji Bhavan,
Besant Nagar, Chennai-600 090.
10.P.Ranganathan
11.Rajendra Rajan
12.A.Ramesh @ Morai A.Ramesh
13.K.Kumar
14.K.Amul Rani
15.The Assistant Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
TNEB/CEDC/WEST,
Bandeswaran,
Chennai-600 055. .. Respondents
W.P.No.28536 of 2010 :
N.Madhivanan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Department of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
2.The District Registrar-South Chennai,
O/o.The District Registrar-South Chennai,
Jones Road,
Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
3.The Sub Registrar-Avadi,
Poonamallee Avadi Trunk Road,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
4.Rajendra Raja
5.Kalli Muthu
6.C.S.Mahalingam .. Respondents
W.P.No.4378 of 2011 :
K.R.Saradha .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Sub Registrar,
Avadi Sub Registration Office,
No.46, 1st Floor, New Military Road,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
2.The Collector,
Collectorate Office,
Thiruvallur District-602 001. .. Respondents
W.P.No.7282 of 2011 :
Dr.C.Suryanarayana .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State rep. By
1.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
3.The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai Suburban Police Headquarters,
St.Thomas Mound,
Chennai-600 016. .. Respondents
W.P.No.13591 of 2011 :
E.P.Dasaratha Naidu .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Sub Registrar,
Office of the Sub Registrar,
Avadi, Chennai.
2.K.R.Sarada .. Respondents
W.P.No.14679 of 2011 :
N.Rajeshkumar .. Petitioner
Vs.
The Sub Registrar,
O/o.The Sub Registrar,
Avadi, Chennai-600 055. .. Respondents
W.P.Nos.1846 and 1880 of 2012 :
A.Ramesh .. Petitioner in
W.P.No.1846 of 2012
M.Paramasivam .. Petitioner in
W.P.No.1880 of 2012
Vs.
The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Tiruvallur District
Chennai-600 053. .. Respondent in
both petitions
W.P.No.17957 of 2012 :
P.Mohan .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
The Inspector General of Registration Office,
No.100, Santhome Highway,
Pattinambakkan, Chennai-600 028.
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
No.27,Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Avadi Sub Registrar Office,
Avadi Municipality Old Building,
Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents
W.P.No.17877 of 2012 :
J.Samundaeswari .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Thiruvallur District,
Chennai-600 053.
3.The Sub Registrar,
Avadi Sub Registration Office,
Thiruvallur District.
4.The Inspector of Police,
T-7, Avadi Tank Factory Police Station,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents
W.P.No.22708 of 2012 :
J.V.D.Durai .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
rep by its Revenue Secretary,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Special Commissioner and
Commissioner of Land Administration,
Ezhilagam, chepauk,
Chennai-600 005.
3.The District Collector,
Tiruvallur District, Thiruvallur.
4.The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk, Tiruvallur District.
5.M/s.Vel Tech Group of Institutions,
rep by its Founder & Chairman,
Mr.R.Rangarajan,
Santhi Sudha,
No.38, Old No.24, ABM Avenue,
R.A.Puram, Chennai-28.
5.The Superintendent of Police,
CBCID, Chennai. .. Respondents
W.P.No.30554 of 2012 :
K.S.Saradha .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome, Chennai-600 028.
2.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur Collectorate, Thiruvallur.
3.The Inspector General of Police (North Zone),
Alandur, Chennai-600 016.
4.The Sub Registrar, Avadi,
Chennai-600 054. .. Respondents
W.P.No.7849 of 2010 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to order for survey of lands comprises of Survey Nos.S.No.290/2, 291/1, 293/2&3, 294/8&9, 306/1&2, 307/2&6, 316/2,3&4, 334/1 & 317/3 at 43 with the help of the field measurements and village maps and other relevant documents pertaining to the Morai village and further direct them to file a report within a stipulated period. W.P.No.16896 of 2010 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st and 6th respondents to ensure the Article 21 of the Constitution of India for our Veerapuram New Colony Welfare Association members peaceful living. W.P.No.28536 of 2010 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the 3rd respondent herein not to admit or entertain any document presented by respondent No.4 to 6 or his henchmen or his power agent / legal representative in respect of the land covered under S.No.490 Part of Morai Village, Ambattur Taluk and Thiruvallur District. W.P.No.4378 of 2011 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to accept documents presented for registration, in respect of the property situated at Thiruvallur District, Ambattur Taluk in Morai Village comprised in Survey Nos.507/8,11,12 and S.Nos.514/9B, 10 and 11 totally measuring about acre 3.34 cents, if duly executed, stamped and satisfies the requirement of law. W.P.No.7282 of 2011 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 31.12.2010. W.P.No.13591 of 2011 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the first respondent vide its communication in Na.Ka.112/2011 dated 27.04.2011 and quash the same. W.P.No.14679 of 2011 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent in No.Na.Ka.148/2011 dated 13.6.2011 and quash the same and to direct the respondent to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner in respect of the property bearing plot No.26, Sree Niketan Nagar measuring an extent of 8333 sq.feet comprised in S.No.498/5A/2F of Morai village, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District. W.P.Nos.1846 and 1880 of 2012 are preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 19.12.2011 for the surveying in respect of the petitioner housesite mentioned therein (in W.P.No.1846 of 2012) and for a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application dated 19.12.2011 for the sub division and patta name change in respect of his house site mentioned therein (in W.P.No.1880 of 2012). W.P.No.17877 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the second respondent to survey the petitioner's land in Morai village, Plot No.55, Military Survey No.56/5, New Survey No.498/4, 510/1 about 2,650 sq.ft. W.P.No.17957 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the third respondent to register the petitioner land situated at old No.39, new no.5, Morai village, Balaji Nagar to third party on considering the petitioner's representation, dated 04.07.2012. W.P.No.22708 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 1to 4 to remove the encroachments in S.No.294/2, 3, 4 and 5 in Morai village, Tiruvallur District and restore and protect the same as Government Grazing ground poramboke. W.P.No.30554 of 2012 is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent comprised in Order No.Ka.No.50362/R3/10, dated 30.8.2010 and the consequential order in No.Ka.No.50362/R3/10 dated 19.11.2010 and quash the same as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and consequently direct the 4th respondent to accept and register the documents peresented by the petitioner insofar as it relates to lands comprised in S.Nos.514/9B (0.03 cents), 514/11 (0.05 cents), 514/12 (0.30 cents) and 507/8 (1.08 cents), totalling to 1.44 cents, S.No.514/11 to an extent of 60 cents and S.No.514/9B to an extent of 67 cents all in Morai village, without insisting upon No objection certificate from the 2nd and 3rd respondents.
For Petitioners : Mr.C.Umashankar in WP.7849 /2010
Mr.A.Ramesh in WP.16896 / 2010
and in W.P.No.7282 of 2011
Mr.S.Rajendran in WP.28536 of 2010
Mr.N.Muralikumaran for
Mr.B.Divakaran in WP.4378 of 2011 and
for M/s.McGan Law Firm in WP.13591/ 2011
Mr.K.R.Gunasekar
in W.Ps.1846 and 1880 of 2012
Mr.D.Senthilkumar in WP.14679 of 2011
Mr.A.Ramesh Manikandan
in W.P.Nos.17877, 17957 of 2012
Mr.S.Senthil in W.P.No.22708 of 2012
Mr.Ma.Gouthaman in W.P.No.30554 of 2012
For Respondents : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl.G.P.
for RR1 and 2 in WP.7849 /2010
for RR1 to 7 in W.P.16896 /2010
for RR1 to 3 in WP.28536 of 2010
for RR1 to 3 in WP.7282 of 2011
for respondents in W.P.4378 of 2011
for R-1 in W.P.No.13591 of 2011
for respondent in W.P.14679 of 2011
for respondents in W.Ps.1846 & 1880 /2012
for respondents in W.Ps.17877, 17957 /2012
for RR1 to 4 and 6 in W.P. 22708 of 2012
for respondents in W.P.No.30554 of 2012
Mr.N.Chandrasekaran
for RR8 and 9 in WP.16896 of 2010
Mr.Chirstu Raj for R-11
in W.P.16896 of 2010
for R-4 in WP.28536 of 2010
S.Jagan for R-5 in WP.28536 of 2010
Mr.S.Thankasivan
for R-5 in W.P.No.22708 of 2012
- - - -
COMMON ORDER
All these writ petitions came to be posted on being specially ordered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice vide order dated 18.07.2012.
2.These writ petitions are fall out of the litigations launched by the two groups of persons, who were claiming to be owners of lands in Morai Village. Several writ petitions and suits as well as civil revision petitions were filed by these two groups. For the sake of brevity, they can be called as Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. Since some of the writ petitions also related to the same survey numbers and also impleaded Rajendra Raja and his group, it is necessary to recapitulate the dispute between the Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group.
The case put up by the Amaravathy Cranes group are as follows :
3.The lands to an extent of 1743 acres in Morai Village were taken over by the District Collector of the the Chengalpattu District under Rule 75A(1) of the Defence of India Rules during the Second World War vide proceedings, dated 26.10.1944. After the end of the World War-II, lands were de-requisitioned to the respective land owners. Since the land use pattern was considerably changed, the land owners had decided to sell the lands. Accordingly, the Amaravathy Cranes had purchased the properties from the respective land owners under 39 sale deeds in the year 1965. The Amaravathy Cranes purchased a vast extent of agricultural punja lands comprised in different survey numbers in Morai village by virtue of sale deeds. It was claimed that ever since the purchase, the company was in possession and enjoyment being its absolute owner.
4.The Board of Revenue on 11.09.1967 took a decision to set aside the existing registry made at the time of settlement in respect of the lands and decided to conduct a denova settlement enquiry after complying with the procedures contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Act 26 of 1948. A suo motu enquiry was taken up for the grant of ryotwari patta in respect of S.No.474/1 onwards in Morai village. The settlement Tahsildar at Chengalpattu was authorised to conduct an enquiry vide notification dated 19.5.1976. The Settlement Tahsildar had conducted an enquiry and included the land for the grant of ryotwari patta. He had passed an order on 23.7.1976, 24.07.1976 and 30.07.1976 in respect of proceedings in S.R.Nos.14 to 16 of 1976. The Settlement Tahsildar had issued ryotwari patta not only to the Amaravathy Cranes, but also to 46 other persons. The Amaravathy Cranes got ryotwari patta to an extent of 165 acres. In respect of other lands, several other individuals were given patta. No one questioned the ryotwari patta granted by the Settlement Tahsildar to those 46 persons by the same proceedings issued. The other lands were also classified as assessed waste manavari, cart track poramboke, temple poramboke, assessed waster dry, channel porambokel, puzhakal poramboke and road poramboke. Subsequent to the amendment made to the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, as amended by the Tamil Nadu Act 17 of 1970, the Authorised Officer (Land Reforms), Kancheepuram under whose jurisdiction the lands were situated took an action in terms of the provisions of the Land Ceiling Act. He had published a draft settlement under Section 10(1) of the Land Reforms Act vide gazette notification, dated 25.03.1981 and served the copy on the Amaravathy Cranes.
5.The Amaravathy Cranes had filed its objection before the Authorised officer. The Authorised Officer by virtue of the power under Section 10(5) of the Act had rejected the objection made by the Amaravathy Cranes. The Amaravathy Cranes had filed a revision petition under Section 82 of the Land Reforms Act before the Land Commissioner, Chennai. The revision was also dismissed on the ground of maintainability in view of the appeal available under Section 78 of the Act. Thereafter, the Amaravathy Cranes filed an appeal before the Land Tribunal in LT CMA No.86 of 1991. The appeal was allowed on 04.05.1992 and the matter was remitted back to the Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms) for fresh disposal in the light of the observations made by the Tribunal. After remand, the Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms), Villupuram personally inspected the lands and agreed with the contention of the Amaravathy Cranes with reference to the land use pattern. The Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms) by his proceedings had cancelled the final settlement, which was published in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette on 22.09.1993. Based on the findings of the Assistant Commissioner (Land Reforms), the Deputy Secretary to the Government by proceedings, dated 16.02.1994 had cancelled the notification issued by the Revenue Department, dated 21.09.1981. After the gazette notification, necessary changes were carried out in the revenue records and the lands were entered in the name of the Amaravathy Cranes. The company has been in possession of the land and are paying kist upto date to the Government. The Amaravathy Cranes also obtained patta and mutation of records had been effected. The 39 sale deeds under which lands were purchased were genuine.
6.Amaravathy Cranes' Directors had filed a suit in O.S.No.258 of 2009 before the District Munsif, Ambattur against the Rajendra Raja group, who were shown as defendants, seeking for a declaration of title to the property as well as for permanent injunction. Rajendra Raja had also filed I.A.No.877 of 2009 for rejecting the plaint. The Amaravathy Cranes sold a part of the lands in different survey numbers in favour of its family members between the year 1995 and 2002. The patta was also transferred in the name of the individuals in respect of the lands sold and purchased by the company's family members and they are also in absolute possession and enjoyment. But, however, during July, 2009, the Rajendra Raja group, who was the land grabber and benami of an influential politician with the help of political influence had attempted to interfere with the possession of the Avmaravathy Cranes. Initially, a temporary injunction was obtained against them. But subsequently, in C.M.A.Nos.8 and 9 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee, the injunction was vacated. As against the same, the Directors of the company preferred civil revision petitions under Article 227 of the Constitution in C.R.P.Nos.1456 and 1457 of 2011.
7.In the meanwhile, on 29.7.2009, the Tahsildar had issued a notice for conducting a fresh proceedings on 29.7.2009. The said proceedings were initiated on the basis of a petition submitted by the Rajendra Raja group claiming patta in respect of the survey number which is owned by the company. The proceedings initiated by the said Tahsildar was challenged by the Amaravathy cranes in W.P.No.15438 of 2009 and this court had granted an interim stay. The said writ petition was disposed of in the light of the subsequent writ petition filed in W.P.No.25413 of 2009. Subsequently, when the Rajendra Raja group attempted to get the electricity service connection, the Directors of the Amaravathy cranes also filed W.P.Nos.21800 to 21802 of 2009 and an order of injunction was granted against the electricity authorities. When Rajendra Raja attempted to create false documents, the company also filed W.P.Nos.21877 to 21879 of 2009 seeking a restraint against the Sub Registrar, Avadi not to admit and register any documents by way of sale or gift, etc. In that writ petitions also, interim orders were granted. In order to stop the criminal activities of the Rajendra Raja group, Amaravathy Cranes gave a complaint in Crime No.122 of 2009, which was registered against Rajendra Raja under Sections 120B, 147, 447, 465, 471, 474, 420, 506(ii) read with 34 IPC. The case was subsequently taken up for investigation by the CBCID.
The case put up by the Rajendra Raja group are as follows :
8.Rajendra Raja group sent a petition, dated 30.10.2009 to the Assistant Settlement Officer alleging that he has grievance over the order passed by the Assistant Settlement Tahsildar, Chengalpattu made in the year 1976. Without applying his mind, the Assistant Settlement Officer had issued a proceedings, dated 6.11.2009 seeking to conduct an enquiry in the complaint lodged by the Rajendra Raja. The Amaravathy Cranes filed W.P.No.25413 of 2009 and an order of stay was granted on 09.12.2009. That writ petition was dismissed by this court by an order dated 19.02.2013. The Rajendra Raja group filed various suits in O.S.Nos.367 to 371, 397 to 410, 421 to 430 and 435 to 444 of 2011 before the District Munsif, Ambattur seeking for declaration that the sale deeds executed by the Amaravathy Cranes in favour of third parties are not binding on Rajendra Raja and for permanent injunction. It is at this juncture, the Amaravathy Cranes has come forward to file civil revision petitions in C.R.P.(PD)Nos.1872 to 1910 of 2012 under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to strike out various plaints on the file of the District Munsif, Amabttur.
9.Rajendra Raja claimed that he is one of the legal heirs of Shrodriyamdars, i.e., Kumaramalrazu. The lands were comprised in the Shrodriyam village, i.e., Vellanoor and Morai. They are owned and enjoyed by the ancestors of his great grandfathers and it can be verified from the title deed. Both melvaram and keelvaram rights were held and enjoyed by them as Mirasdars of the then Chengalpet District. Their grand father Kumaramalrazu had gifted 52 cawnies of unoccupied land to Akilandakodi Bramandanayakar Sri Thiruvengadamudaiyan temple by way of registered document No.248/1873. His ancestors had alienated a portion of the land. Some of the ancestors have also bequeathed their share to their respective heirs by executing documents. The documents were executed over the years in different period starting from 1892 to 1941 by the members of their family. They are holding right to possess the lands and are also in possession continuously since 1780. Notwithstanding these facts, Karnam and Munsif of the village, who belonged to Pillai community, were jealous about the family status of the Rajendra Raja's ancestors and made wrong entries in the official land records of the Government. The malpractices came to their knowledge only after many years. After the introduction of the Madras Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948, the survey and settlement work was started by the Government and it was completed by 1961. In fact, against the proceedings initiated, a denova proceeding was ordered by the Board of Revenue. Such a denova enquiry is yet to be completed. After several years, the Settlement Tahsildar, Chengalpattu, by name one C.Subramaniam, had conducted a denova enquiry on 23.07.1976. Without any proper enquiry, he had passed an order within a week and directed the grant of ryotwari patta to an extent of 177 acres to the Amaravathy Cranes and 124.25 acres for other 56 persons. In a short enquiry, without any records and documents, he had ordered ryotwari patta to an extent of 385.32 acres. The lands in Morai village are dry vacant lands and that the members of the Rajendra Raja group enjoyed the same as a original inamdars. They were not aware of these facts till the year 2009. Except Rajendra Raja, no one has right or interest in the lands, which were described in the schedule to the plaints. The Rajendra Raja came to understand that the Amaravathy Cranes had created forged documents with the help of the junior officials of the Revenue department. They have no right to take the law in their own hands. The forged documents have to be declared as null and void by the court. Therefore, the suits in O.S.Nos.367 to 371, 397 to 410, 421 to 430 and 435 to 444 of 2011 came to be filed for declaration that the 39 sale deeds executed by Amaravathy Cranes as null and void and for a permanent injunction before the Court of District Munsif, Ambattur. As against those suits, the Amaravathy Cranes filed C.R.P.(PD)Nos.1872 to 1910 of 2012 to strike off the plaints. Those civil revision petitions were dismissed by this court on 18.02.2013. It is in these background, present cases will have to be considered.
10.W.P.No.16896 of 2010 : This writ petition is filed by the Secretary of Veerapuram New Colony Welfare Association, seeking for a direction to ensure that Article 21 of the Constitution is available to the members of their association. Different members of the petitioner association have filed different criminal original petitions before this court as found in the typed set , where a direction was given to register the case against the named accused. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to work out his right in terms of the direction given by this court. Hence the present writ petition with an omnibus prayer cannot be countenanced by this court. Accordingly, W.P.No.16896 of 2010 will stand dismissed.
11.W.P.No.28536 of 2010 : This writ petition is filed for a direction to the Sub Registrar, Avadi not to entertain any document presented by respondents 4 to 6 (Rajendra Raja group) or their power agent in respect of the land covered under S.No.490 Part of Morai village.
12.The petitioner in that writ petition, if he claims that he is the owner of the agricultural lands in respect of the said survey number and there is an attempt to disturb his possession, it is for him to approach the appropriate civil court. Already this court in the writ petitions filed by the Amaravathy Cranes group had declined the similar relief on the ground that the group had obtained an injunction against the Rajendra Raja group in I.A.Nos.805 and 806 of 2009 in O.S.No.258 of 2009, dated 27.11.2009, which was also confirmed in C.R.P.(PD)Nos.1456 and 1457 of 2011, dated 18.02.2013. Even otherwise, the Registrar being the statutory authority in terms of the Registration Act is entitled to consider any deed presented for registration in accordance with law and no order of restraint can be given to him by this court. It is only when an improper exercise of power under the Registration Act is made, the question of the judicial review over such an action of the Registrar will arise. Even if the document is registered fraudulently, the Registrar has got power to cancel the same. The power of the Registrar in such circumstances came to be explained by a Full Bench of this court in M/s.Latif Estate Line India Ltd. Vs. Mrs.Hadeeja Ammal and others reported in 2011 (1) LW 673, and in paragraph 59, it was held as follows :
"59.After giving our anxious consideration on the questions raised in the instant case, we come to the following conclusion: -
A deed of cancellation of a sale unilaterally executed by the transferor does not create, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest in the property and is of no effect. Such a document does not create any encumbrance in the property already transferred. Hence such a deed of cancellation cannot be accepted for registration.
Once title to the property is vested in the transferee by the sale of the property, it cannot be divested unto the transferor by execution and registration of a deed of cancellation even with the consent of the parties. The proper course would be to re-convey the property by a deed of conveyance by the transferee in favour of the transferor.
Where a transfer is effected by way of sale with the condition that title will pass on payment of consideration, and such intention is clear from the recital in the deed, then such instrument or sale can be cancelled by a deed of cancellation with the consent of both the parties on the ground of non-payment of consideration. The reason is that in such a sale deed, admittedly, the title remained with the transferor.
In other cases, a complete and absolute sale can be cancelled at the instance of the transferor only by taking recourse to the Civil Court by obtaining a decree of cancellation of sale deed on the ground inter alia of fraud or any other valid reasons."
Hence, giving liberty to the petitioner to move the appropriate civil court, the W.P.No.28536 of 2010 will stand dismissed.
13.W.P.No.4378 of 2011 : The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to the Sub Registrar, Avadi to accept the documents for registration in respect of the property situated at Thiruvallur District, Ambattur Taluk in Morai Village comprised in Survey Nos.507/8,11,12 and S.Nos.514/9B, 10 and 11 measuring about acre 3.34 cents, if duly executed, stamped and satisfies the requirement of law.
14.The land covered in the writ petition is the subject matter of dispute between the Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to establish her credentials before the appropriate civil court relating to the title and thereafter seek for a direction to the Registrar, who in any event is bound by the order of the civil court. Hence, W.P.No.4378 of 2011 will stand dismissed.
15.W.P.No.7282 of 2011 : The prayer in this writ petition is for a direction to dispose of the representation, dated 31.12.2010 sent by him to the District Collector, Tiruvallur, Director General of Police and the Additional Director General of Police. It was stated that the Rajendra Raja group is illegally trespassing into their land and creating records. Already this court had referred to the criminal cases launched against Rajendra Raja group. It is for the petitioner to file an appropriate complaint before the jurisdictional police station and proceed to prosecute them. In the light of the same, W.P.No.7282 of 2011 will stand dismissed.
16.W.P.No.13591 of 2011 : This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge an order, dated 27.04.2011 passed by the Sub Registrar, Avadi informing him that the matters relating to the survey numbers in question were the subject matter in dispute and therefore, the documents cannot be registered. As rightly informed by the Registrar, the survey numbers in question are claimed by two rival groups, i.e., Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group and the matters are pending before the civil court. Therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the Sub Registrar. It is for the petitioner, if he claims that he has an independent right to the property, to move the appropriate civil court to establish his right. Accordingly, W.P.No.13591 of 2011 will stand dismissed.
17.W.P.No.14679 of 2011 : This writ petition is to set aside the order dated 13.06.2011 issued by the Sub Registrar informing the petitioner that S.Bo.498/5A/2F is subject to the direction issued by this court in W.P.Nos.21877 to 21879 of 2009. Those writ petitions have been disposed of on 19.02.2013.
18.It must be noted that a direction issued by the Inspector General of Registration based upon a complaint made by the police not to register the documents has been upheld by an order of this court in W.P.No.22985 of 2010, dated 19.01.2011. In paragraphs 14 and 15 of the order, it was observed as follows: "14.Even though the registering authority cannot conduct a roving enquiry, with regard to the title of the properties, which is the subject matter of the sale deed, it would be open to the said authority to be prima facie satisfied about the authority and the veracity of the transactions. Even though Section 34 of the Registration Act, 1908, and Rule 55 of the Tamilnadu Registration Rules, 1983, imposed certain restrictions on the registering authority, it cannot be said that such restrictions are absolute and conclusive. If the Inspector General of Registration issues certain directions to the registering authorities, in public interest, in order to protect unwary purchasers of certain disputed properties, it cannot be held that such instructions are, automatically, arbitrary and invalid. In the impugned communication of the first respondent, dated 30.8.2010, it has been stated that 167 acres of lands in Morai Village had been encroached upon, illegally, by various persons and that the lands are being sold as plots, by forming layouts, without getting the necessary approval from the panchayat concerned.
15.It had also been stated that the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority had not granted the necessary approval for the sale of the plots. Further, three criminal cases had been registered in respect of the lands in question. Since, the land sought to be sold by way of the sale deed, dated 18.8.2010, is in one of the survey numbers mentioned in the impugned instructions of the first respondent, dated 30.8.2010, the fourth respondent had asked the petitioner to obtain the `No Objection Certificates' from the Inspector General of Police, C.B.C.I.D, Chennai and the District Collector, Tiruvallur District. As such, it cannot be said that the directions issued by the first respondent in his impugned communication, dated 30.8.2010, which had been issued in public interest, cannot be held to be arbitrary, illegal and void. Since, the writ petition is devoid of merits, it is liable to be dismissed. Hence, it is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed."
In the light of the above, W.P.No.14679 of 2011 will stand dismissed.
19.W.P.Nos.1846 and 1880 of 2012 :Both writ petitions are filed seeking for a direction to consider the petitioners' representations by the Tahsildar. In the representations dated 19.12.2011, a copy of which is enclosed in the typed set, the petitioners are seeking for the grant of patta in respect of S.Nos.508/5, 508/6 and 508/8 in Morai village. Lands on these survey numbers are in dispute between the two groups, i.e., Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. Therefore, it is for the petitioners to move the appropriate civil court to establish their right. In the light of the same, both W.P.Nos.1846 and 1880 of 2012 will stand dismissed.
20.W.P.No.17877 of 2012 : This writ petition is filed seeking for a direction to the Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk for surveying the lands in Morai village in respect of S.Nos.498/4 and 510/1. A status report, dated 03.10.2012 was filed by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch CID, Headquarters, Chennai. Those survey numbers are subject matter of dispute between Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. In the light of the above, W.P.No.17877 of 2012 will stand dismissed.
21.W.P.No.17957 of 2012 : The petitioner in this writ petition seeks for a direction to the Sub Registrar to register the lands of the petitioner by considering his representation, dated 04.07.2012. In the representation, a copy of which is enclosed in the typed set, the petitioner referred to S.No.514/11. It is the subject matter in dispute between the Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil court to establish his right. In the light of the same, W.P.No.17957 of 2012 will stand dismissed.
22.W.P.Nos.7849 of 2010 and 22708 of 2012 : W.P.No.22708 of 2012 was filed initially as the Public Interest Litigation and came up before the division bench headed the then Chief Justice. The division bench by an order dated 19.11.2012 directed the matter to be posted before the single Bench. The petitioner claiming to be the President of Morai Industrial Estate Association for over 10 years. He is seeking for a direction to respondents 1 to 4 to remove the encroachments in S.Nos.294/2,3 4 and 5 in Morai village and also to restore and protect the same as the Government grazing ground poramboke.
23.The same association has also filed a writ petition in W.P.No.7849 of 2010 seeking for surveying the land comprising of various survey numbers with the help of the field measurements and village maps. If the petitioner and his association is aggrieved that the lands in their possession was at stake, they have to file appropriate civil suits through their individual members and not to file a general writ petition. This court is not inclined to entertain the omnibus prayer at the hands of the association. Hence both W.P.Nos.7849 of 2010 and 22708 of 2012 will stand dismissed.
24.W.P.No.30554 of 2012 : In this writ petition, the challenge is to an order of the Inspector General of Registration, dated 30.08.2010 and the consequential order dated 19.11.2010 and after holding them unconstitutional, the petitioner seeks for a direction to the 4th respondent Sub Registrar to accept and register the documents presented by the petitioner so far as it related to S.Nos.514/9B, 514/11, 514/12, 507/8 and 514/11 in Morai village without insisting no objection certificate.
25.It must be noted that the very same survey numbers is the question of disputed claim between Amaravathy Cranes group and Rajendra Raja group. Already, the order of the Inspector General of Registration has been upheld in W.P.No.22985 of 2010, dated 19.01.2011 (referred in paragraph 18). In the light of the same, no relief can be granted in this writ petition. Hence W.P.No.30554 of 2012 will stand dismissed.
26.In the light of the above, all writ petitions will stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, all connected miscellaneous petitions will stand dismissed.
20.02.2013
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
vvk
To
1.The Collector,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvalur-602 001
Tamil Nadu.
2.The Tahsildar,
Ambattur Taluk,
Ambattur, Chennai.
3.The District Revenue Officer,
Thiruvallur District,
Thiruvallur.
4.The Registrar,
Registrar Office,
No.120,Santhome High Road,
Chennai-600 028.
5.The Sub-Registrar,
Avadi Sub Registrar Office,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
6.The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai Suburban Police Headquarters,
St. Thomas Mount, Chennai-600 016.
7.The Inspector of Police,
T-7, Tank Factory Police Station,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
8.The Superintendent,
The Central Bureau Investigation (Corruption Wing),
3rd Floor, Haddows Road,
Chennai-600 006.
9.The Police Superintendent,
The Central Bureau Investigation,
Special Crime Branch,
'A' Wing, 3rd Floor, Rajaji Bhavan,
Besant Nagar, Chennai-600 090.
10.The Assistant Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
TNEB/CEDC/WEST,
Bandeswaran,
Chennai-600 055.
11.The Inspector General of Registration,
Department of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
12.The District Registrar-South Chennai,
O/o.The District Registrar-South Chennai,
Jones Road,
Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
13.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration,
No.27,Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 001.
14.The Inspector of Police,
T-7, Avadi Tank Factory Police Station,
Avadi, Chennai-600 054.
15.The Revenue Secretary,
The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
16.The Special Commissioner and
Commissioner of Land Administration,
Ezhilagam, chepauk,
Chennai-600 005.
17.The Superintendent of Police,
CBCID, Chennai.
18.The Inspector General of Police (North Zone),
Alandur, Chennai-600 016.
K.CHANDRU, J.
vvk
ORDER IN
W.P.Nos.7849, 16896 and
28536 of 2010, 4378, 7282,
13591 and 14679 of 2011,
1846, 1880, 17877, 17957,
22708 and 30554 of 2012
20.02.2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 05.03.2012 Coram THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K.SHARMA W.P.No.21141 of 2011
A.KATHIRAVAN ... PETITIONER
- vs -
1. THE DISTRICT SURVEY OFFICER THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, THIRUVALLUR.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CHENNAI SUB-URBAN, ST.THOMAS MOUNT, CHENNAI - 600 016.
3. VENKATASAMY NAIDU 4. ARUMUGAM 5. RAJAN 6. BABU 7. RASI BEGUM ... Respondents.
(R3 to R7 impleaded as Order dated 28.10.2011)
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to survey measure and mark the boundaries of the schedule property in accordance with law as requested in the representation dated 16.08.2011 of the petitioner and further directing the 2nd respondent to give appropriate protection if so required by the 1st respondent in carrying out the above survey and measurement. For Petitioner : Mr.R.C.Paul Kanagaraj
For R1 & R2 : Mr.R.Ravichandran Addl. Govt. Pleader
O R D E R The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the natuer of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to survey measure, and mark the boundaries of the schedule property in accordance with law, as requested vide representation dated 16.08.2011 and further to direct the 2nd respondent to give appropriate protection, if so required by the 1st respondent in carrying out the survey and measurement.
2. It is submitted by the petitioner that immovable property to the extent of 10 acres 92 cents, as fully described in the schedule, is possessed by petitioner, in pursuance to the deed of release executed on 27.11.2009, by Manickam and others. That while petitioner was enjoying the property peacefully, as owner thereof and was also issued computer generated patta, by the Tahsildar Officer, Ambattur, Venkatasamy Naidu, Arumugam, Rajan, Babu and Rasi Begum started interfering in the possession and enjoyment of the property of petitioner, which forced the petitioner to file civil suit.
3. The prayer made in the civil suit, reads as under: "Permanent injunction to restrain the defendants their men, agents, representatives or any one acting under them in any way interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property by the plaintiff in S.No.355/2, 355/1A1A1 and 355/2A1A1A corresponding phamash numbers 21/92 and 21/93 to an extent of 10 acres 92 cents Vellanur Village, Morai Firka, Ambattur Taluk." The petitioner also prayed for grant of interim injunction in the suit, and interim injunction is also granted in favour of petitioner.
4. The case of petitioner is that defendants in the suit have started interfering with the possession of petitioner in raising of fencing, therefore, it has become necessary for the petitioner to get the property surveyed. 5. Subsequent to the filing of writ petition, private respondents have been impleaded as party. However, no specific averments have been made.
6. Once the civil suit filed by petitioner is pending, in which, injunction stands granted in favour of petitioner, as pleaded, the remedy with the petitioner is to prosecute the respondents for violating injunction order, if they have violated the order of injunction.
7. Furthermore, in order to prove ownership and boundaries, it is for the petitioner to lead evidence in civil Court, including summoning of revenue officer etc. with survey report. The jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be used for collecting of evidence for the civil suit pending between the parties.
8. The writ petition, being totally misconceived, is nothing but misuse of process of Court, therefore, it is not maintainable as framed.
9. No merits. Dismissed. No costs.
05.03.2012 Index : Yes Internet : Yes ar
To
1. THE DISTRICT SURVEY OFFICER THIRUVALLUR DISTRICT, THIRUVALLUR.
2. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE CHENNAI SUB-URBAN, ST.THOMAS MOUNT, CHENNAI - 600 016.
VINOD K.SHARMA,J.
ar
W.P.No.21141 of 2011Whois > PalalaKings.com
More Sharing Services
PalalaKings.com Whois Record Ads by Google Samsung Galaxy S4 LaunchJoin us @ Samsung Mobile Store, UB City, Bengaluru, Hurry Now!www.samsung.com/in/Galaxy-S4 L&T Health Insurance6 Hour Response Gaurantee On Claims & Services. Get Instant Policy Now!ltmyhealthinsurance.com Credit Card: Apply OnlineDiscounts, EMI Offers, Loan on Card Bonus Points, Cashbacks* & More!apply.standardchartered.co.in Study Events OnlineBachelor Degree or Diploma Course. Flexible Online Study Options!www.apm.edu.au/Event_Management Class 1 to Class 12Lessons, Animations, Videos & more… Math, EVS, Science, English, SST…www.MeritNation.com/CBSE
Whois Record Site Profile Registration Server Stats For Sale Reverse Whois: "PrivacyProtect.org" was found in about 2,870,934 other domains Email Search: is associated with about 2,926,528 domains Registrar History: 1 registrar NS History: 2 changes on 3 unique name servers over 1 year. IP History: 2 changes on 3 unique IP addresses over 1 years. Whois History: 10 records have been archived since 2012-08-09 . Reverse IP: 540 other sites hosted on this server. Log In or Create a FREE account to start monitoring this domain name Preview the complete Domain Report for palalakings.com
Registration Service Provided By: BIGROCK
Domain Name: PALALAKINGS.COM
Registration Date: 08-Aug-2012 Expiration Date: 08-Aug-2013
Status:LOCKED
Note: This Domain Name is currently Locked.
This feature is provided to protect against fraudulent domain name hijacking, as in
this
status the domain name cannot be transferred or modified. The owner of the Domain Name
can
change the status from within his control panel or approach his service provider for
the same.
Name Servers: ns1.md-16.webhostbox.net ns2.md-16.webhostbox.net Registrant Contact Details: PrivacyProtect.org Domain Admin () ID#10760, PO Box 16 Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to contact the domain owner/operator Nobby Beach Queensland,QLD 4218 AU Tel. +45.36946676
Administrative Contact Details: PrivacyProtect.org Domain Admin () ID#10760, PO Box 16 Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to contact the domain owner/operator Nobby Beach Queensland,QLD 4218 AU Tel. +45.36946676
Technical Contact Details: PrivacyProtect.org Domain Admin () ID#10760, PO Box 16 Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to contact the domain owner/operator Nobby Beach Queensland,QLD 4218 AU Tel. +45.36946676
Billing Contact Details: PrivacyProtect.org Domain Admin () ID#10760, PO Box 16 Note - Visit PrivacyProtect.org to contact the domain owner/operator Nobby Beach Queensland,QLD 4218 AU Tel. +45.36946676
05.03.2012