Writ petition challenging a Tahsildar's order declaring a prima facie case of land grabbing against the petitioner dismissed as the petitioner failed to appear and prosecute the matter.
The writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution on the grounds that the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent and had not chosen to appear.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.10.2014
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN
W.P. No.5723 of 2014 and
M.P.Nos.2 to 4 of 2014
S.Santhi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chief Secretary,
Government of Puducherry,
Puducherry.
2.The District Collector,
Department of Revenue and Disaster
Management,
Government of Puducherry,
Saram, Puducherry.
3.The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Puducherry.
4.The Senior Superintendent of Police
(L & O), Puducherry.
5.The Station House Officer,
Odiansalai Police Station,
Puducherry.
6.Antoinette Yvonne Victoria Dambrun @
Tambrun
7.Maie Eugenie Vanarodja Dambrun
@ Tambrun
8.Marie Joseph Adrien Dambrun @
Tambrun
9.Marie Antoinette Leduine Burgues
11.Marie Francisque Xavier Dambrun ... Respondents
(Respondents 6, 7 and 9 to 11 are rep. By their power agent R8)
Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the order in No.22/TOP/TAH/LANDGRAB/PF/2014 dated 11.02.2014 passed by the third respondent and quash the same and consequently forbear the respondents from interfering in any manner with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in respect of the property measuring about 1656 sq. ft. in Town Survey Nos.244 and 245 in Block No.16, Ward D, Madha Koil Street, Puducherry purchased by the petitioner in Doc. No.336 of 2012 dated 30.01.2012, Sub Registrar, Puducherry.
For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.A.Tamilvanan, Govt. Advocate (Puducherry) for R1 to R5 Mr.Bharatha Chakravarthy for M/s.Sai, Bharath and Ilan for R6 to R11 ORDER
The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition, challenging the finding recorded by the Tahsildar by his proceedings dated 11.02.2014 that a prima facie case of land grabbing is made out against the petitioner herein.
2.Notice of motion was ordered in the writ petition on 26.02.2014 and an interim injunction was also granted restraining the respondents from proceeding further.
3.After service of notice, the respondents 6 to 11 came up with a petition in M.P.No.4 of 2014 for vacating the interim order of injunction. The petitions for injunction and vacate injunction came up for hearing on 08.10.2014. But the learned counsel for the writ petitioner was absent. Therefore, it was adjourned to today. Even today, the learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. What is stayed by the interim order is an enquiry into the allegations of land grabbing. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner has not
chosen to appear, the writ petition is dismissed for nonprosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/Asst.Registrar (CS III)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
mmi
To
1.The Chief Secretary,
Government of Puducherry,
Puducherry.
2.The District Collector,
Department of Revenue and Disaster
Management,
Government of Puducherry,
Saram, Puducherry.
3.The Tahsildar,
Taluk Office, Puducherry.
4.The Senior Superintendent of Police
(L & O), Puducherry.
5.The Station House Officer,
Odiansalai Police Station,
Puducherry.
1 cc to M/s. Sai, Bharath & Ilan, Advocate, Sr. 48282
W.P.No.5723 of 2014
RBD (CO)
kk 17/10
S. Santhi
The Chief Secretary, Government of Puducherry
The District Collector, Government of Puducherry
The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Puducherry
Antoinette Yvonne Victoria Dambrun
Maie Eugenie Vanarodja Dambrun
V. Ramasubramanian
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
