Court closed the writ petition challenging the registration of sale deeds, accepting counsel's submission that civil suits between the parties were already pending.
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: 21.09.2020
CORAM :
The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.No.13745 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015
M/s.Anush Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., (A Company registered under Companies Act, 1956) rep by its Managing Director M.Sukumar Reddy, Having their office at No.2/1, Abu Garden, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Navalur, OMR, Chennai – 600 130. ...Petitioner Vs.
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to cancel the Sale Deeds (i.e.) (a) Pending Doc.No.6 dated 20.01.2015, regular No.1251 of 2015; (b) Pending Doc.No.7 dated 20.01.2015, regular No.1252 of 2015 and (c) Pending Doc.No.8 dated 20.01.2015, regular No.1253 of 2015, registered on 20.01.2015 in favour of the respondents 4 & 5 ignoring the orders passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.21699, 21700, 21701, 24830, 24592 and 24593 of 2012 dated 10.01.2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Subba Reddy For Respondents : Mr.P.P.Purushothaman,
Government Advocate (R1 to R3)
Mr.S.Amarnath
for Mr.R.Rajiv Gandhi (R4)
R5 – no appearance Mr.N.Damodaran (R6)
The petitioner has filed the above the above Writ Petition to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to cancel the three Sale Deeds dated 20.01.2015 registered as Document Nos.1251 to 1253 of 2015 in favour of the respondents 4 & 5 ignoring the orders passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.21699, 21700, 21701, 24830, 24592 and 24593 of 2012 dated 10.01.2013.
2.When the Writ Petition was taken up for hearing, Mr.P.Subba Reddy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had already filed Civil Suits in O.S.Nos.82 of 2017, 31 of 2018 and 185 of 2018 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Chengalpet and the Civil Suits are pending. Further, the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner would prosecute the suits and that in view of the pendency of the Civil Suits between the parties, the Writ Petition may be closed.
3.Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, since the petitioner had already filed Civil Suits as stated above, the Writ Petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the registration of sale deeds should be allowed in view of the pendency of civil suits between the parties.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s. Anush Infrastructure Pvt Ltd.
State of Tamil Nadu
District Revenue Officer (Stamps)
Sub Registrar
Arunvel Kumar
Mohan Kumar
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
