Court did not express opinion on merits of property ownership dispute. Directs all relevant respondents to pass orders on merits within 16 weeks after affording sufficient hearing opportunity to both parties.
Direction to respondents to pass orders on merits within 16 weeks after hearing both parties.
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: 04.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICEV.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No.14650 of 2021
and
W.M.P.Nos.15531 and 15532 of 2021
(Through Video Conference)
N.Anwar Baig...Petitioner |
|---|
Versus |
1.The Commissioner,Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments,Nungambakkam,Chennai – 600 034. |
2.The Chairman, |
Pallavaram Cantonment,St.Thomas Mount,Chennai – 600 016. |
3.The Executive Officer,Pallavaram Cantonment,St.Thomas Mount,Chennai – 600 016. |
4.The District Collector,Collector's Office,Kancheepuram District. |
5.The Tahsildar,Taluk Office, Alandur,Chennai...Respondents |
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the |
Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, todirect the respondents 1 to 3 to handover the possession of 53 |
grounds comprised in S.No.239, 238 and 240 situated at Main GSTRoad, Pallavaram, Kancheepuram to the petitioner in a time boundmanner to the petitioner. |
For Petitioner :Mr.R.Karunagaran |
For Respondents :Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan,Government Advocate |
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for a Writ of Mandamus
to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to handover the possession of
53 grounds comprised in S.Nos.238, 239 and 240 situated at main
GST Road, Pallavaram, Kancheepuram to the petitioner within a
time frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The case of the petitioner is that his great
grandfather one Dr.Usman Sahib was in possession of the said
property, measuring an extent of fifty five grounds with a
terraced building on the main GST Road, Pallavaram. He had
purchased the said property from one Sundararaman, by way of a
valid sale deed, dated 28.02.1910 and registered the same as
document No.423/1910 in S.Nos.237, 238, 239 & 240 and a patta
was issued in No.52, Cantonment Pallavaram, Pallavaram, Chennai
600 043. After the death of Dr.Usman Sahib, his daughter
Mrs.Ameena Bi, wife of Khader Baig, who was the only legal heir
of the said person, inherited the aforesaid property along with
her sons Nazeer Baig, father of the petitioner and one Ameer
Baig, who died as a bachelor without any issues. After the death
of Mrs.Ameena Bi, the petitioner's father Nazeer Baig was is
possession and enjoyment of the property. After his death, the
petitioner's mother and brothers and sisters, who are the legal
heirs, are in possession and enjoyment of the said property. The
petitioner's mother Mrs.Fathima Bi also died leaving behind the
petitioner, his brothers and sisters namely 1) Mumtaj Begum, 2)
Mohammed Baig, 3) Ahamed Baig, 4) Ashraf Begum, 5) Anzar Baig
and 6) Razia Baig, who have got valid records to prove that
they are the only legal heirs in any Court of law and the same
has been proved by the petitioner in the City Civil Court,
Chennai for two grounds in fifty five grounds, which was
illegally disturbed and reaping the benefits by a private party
in respect of S.No.237.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the first respondent being the Commissioner, H.R. & C.E. has
encroached upon 22 grounds comprised in S.Nos.239 & 240 and
constructed 50 shops and leased out the same to various persons
and also collected rent of Rs.5,000/- in all, every month
totaling a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- was collected as rent by the
first respondent. The Cantonment Board, being the second and
third respondents have also encroached upon 31 grounds comprised
in S.No.238 and constructed a Kalyana Mandabam and every year,
they collected a rent of Rs.12,00,000/- in an unauthorized
manner and illegally without any valid legal records. The
respondents have illegally occupied the said grounds and
constructed a Kalyana Mandapam and a number of shops and they
are enjoying the benefits of the aforesaid property, whereas the
petitioner and other legal heirs are living in a pathetic,
pitiable condition and are made to wander as nomads in the
streets, starving for food and shelter.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has made several representations to the
Authorities by enclosing all the records. But the Cantonment
Board/ respondents 2 and 3, have not handed over the aforesaid
property to the petitioner and they criminally grabbed the
lands. Therefore, the prayer made by the petitioner has become
totally unheeded, discarded and the efforts made by the
petitioner has become futile. The learned counsel for the
petitioner further expressed his grievance that in a democratic
country, the Government Authorities are not helping the poor
citizens by defying the law and instead of considering their
case, they are made to run from pillar to post.
5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,
the respondents have not given any reply to the representation
made by the petitioner and legal notices were also issued on
20.07.2017 narrating all the facts and the respondents did not
have any record to prove their stand on the said property and
illegally occupied the said area by constructing shops and other
buildings as if they are the bonfide owners, when they are not
legally entitled to collect rent from the said persons. On the
other hand, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the property and
he is entitled to collect the rent of the aforementioned
property.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
a writ petition was filed by the petitioner along with his
brothers and sisters, in the year 2009 in W.P.No.22992 of 2009
seeking for transfer of patta in the name of the petitioner by
the fourth and fifth respondents. On 25.01.2010, this Court has
directed the Tahsildar, Alandur to consider the representation
of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of such representation and on 16.04.2010, the
Tahsildar, Alandur issued a call letter in Na.Ka.No.715/A1 to
appear on 27.04.2010 and the petitioner along with his brothers
and sisters appeared before the said fifth respondent and
produced the relevant documents to prove their ownership. But,
till date, the respondents have not passed any orders for the
reasons best known to them.
7. The petitioner further submits that the petitioner's
claim has not been considered and the Government, which acts as
an eminent domain, has got the right to absorb the lands after
paying reasonable compensation. But in the present case in hand,
the respondents, without paying proper compensation, have taken
the said lands from the petitioner, which is not even for a
public purpose and the respondents themselves are holding the
lands. Hence, the petitioner has now approached this Court
seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the
respondents 1 to 3 to handover the possession of lands
comprising 53 grounds in S.Nos.238, 239 and 240 situated at
main GST Road, Pallavaram, Kancheepuram to the petitioner and
also to pay Rs.24,36,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Four Crores and
Thirty Six Lakhs only) as compensation for using and occupying
the said lands.
8. Learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents submitted that based upon the earlier orders passed
by this Court in W.P.No.22992 of 2009, the Tahsildar,
Pallavaram was directed to consider the representation of the
petitioner and accordingly the Tahsildar, Pallavaram has called
the petitioner to appear before him for an enquiry on 08.10.2021
before the said office and the petitioner is hereby directed to
appear before the Authorities and produce all the relevant
documents to prove his case and after scrutinizing the
documents, the Tahsildar, Pallavaram shall pass appropriate
orders within the time frame that shall be fixed by this Court.
9. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
case, this Court directs the respondents to pass appropriate
orders after affording sufficient opportunity of hearing to both
the parties and pass appropriate orders on merits and in
accordance with law, within a period of sixteen (16) weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands Disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
Assistant Registrar
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar
sts
To
1.The Commissioner,
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 600 034.
2.The Chairman,
Pallavaram Cantonment,
St.Thomas Mount,
Chennai – 600 016.
3.The Executive Officer, Pallavaram Cantonment, St.Thomas Mount, Chennai – 600 016.4.The District Collector, Collector's Office, Kancheepuram District.5.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Alandur, Chennai .+1cc to M/s.R.Karunakaran, Advocate SR.No.52075+1cc to the Government Pleader SR.No.52449W.P.No.14650 of 2021
KSM(CO)
RVM(02/11/2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Writ Court can direct authorities to hand over possession of land without expressing opinion on merits in property dispute.
Whether the tahsildar is directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim with opportunity of hearing.
N. Anwar Baig
The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Chennai
The Chairman, Pallavaram Cantonment, Chennai
The Executive Officer, Pallavaram Cantonment, Chennai
The District Collector, Kancheepuram District
The Tahsildar, Alandur, Chennai
V. Bhavani Subbaroyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court