Dismissed

N.Krishnan v. The Thasildhar

Madras HC15 Dec 2021WP/34862/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking a Mandamus to direct the Thasildhar to complete an enquiry. The court held the petition was devoid of merits due to the petitioner's father's prior failure to appear after a remand order, the petitioner's lack of current possession, and the unavailability of the property. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed and the conn

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed; no order as to costs.

N.Krishnan Vs The Thasildhar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 15.12.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

W.P.No.34862 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.35633 of 2019

N.Krishnan

...Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The Thasildhar, Omalur Taluk,

¶10

Salem - District.

¶11

2.The Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Muthunaickenpatty, Omalur (TK),

¶12

Salem - District.

¶13

3.The President, Chellapillai Kuttai Village Panchayat, Chellapillai Kuttai Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem - District. ...Respondents

¶14

Prayer :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent Thasildhar to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.7594 of 1985 and the proceeding of the first respondent dated 17.10.2018 by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 05.10.2018.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balachandran

¶16

For R1 : Mr.P.Baladhandayutham Special Government Pleader

¶17

ORDER

¶18

This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent Thasildhar to complete the enquiry and pass appropriate orders as per the directions of this Hon'ble Court in W.P.No.7594 of 1985 and the proceeding of the first respondent dated 17.10.2018 by considering the representation of the petitioner dated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 05.10.2018.

¶19

Heard Mr.D.Balachandran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent.

¶20

The property comprised in Survey No.187/1 and 187/2, ad-measuring 19.46 acres situated at Chellapillakuttai Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, owned by one P.S.Ranganathan. The petitioner's father was being the cultivating tenant of the subject property, the said P.S.Ranganathan, sold out 9.40 acres to the mother of the petitioner herein on various dates by various sale deeds. The remaining extent of the land ad-measuring 10.06 acres was under the cultivation of the petitioner's father. Thereafter, the said P.S.Ranganathan had entered into an agreement for sale with regard to 5 acres with the petitioner's father on 16.10.1985. The remaining extent of the land ad-measuring 5.06 acres were sold out to various persons. On the strength of the agreement for sale, the petitioner's father filed a suit in O.S.No.241 of 1986 for specific performance and the same was allowed and directed the said P.S.Ranganathan to execute a sale deed in favour of the petitioner's father. Accordingly, the sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner's father in E.P.No.73 of 2000 in O.S.No.241 of 1986.

¶21

Originally, the petitioner's father was declared as cultivating tenant and the same was challenged before the appellate authority by the said P.S.Ranganathan and it was allowed and the same was challenged by the petitioner's father before this Court in W.P.No.7594 of 1985 and by an order dated 14.11.1995, it was set aside and remanded back to the appellate authority for fresh consideration. However, no order has been passed and the petitioner's father died on 24.12.2016. In fact, the petitioner's father filed a suit for injunction and it was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner's father filed an appeal and the same was also dismissed in A.S.No.16 of 2018 by the Judgment and Decree dated 27.08.2019 on the file of the Sub Court, Omalur Taluk, Salem District. Now, the petitioner claimed the entire extent of the property, ad-measuring 19.46 acres in Survey No. 187/1 and 187/2 situated at Chellapillakuttai Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem District, on the strength of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.7594 of 1985 dated 14.11.1995. Admittedly, thereafter there were so many transactions as stated supra and no property is available.

¶22

A perusal of the counter filed by the first respondent revealed that after the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.7594 of 1985, dated 14.11.1995, the petitioner's father never appeared before the Record Officer and failed to submit any petition. His father was not declared as cultivating tenant by the Record Officer, Omalur. That apart, no property is available now and the petitioner is not in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ possession of the said properties.

¶23

Hence, the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

Deputy Registrar (CS)

¶26

//True Copy//

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶28

¶29

¶30

1.The Thasildhar, Omalur Taluk, Salem - District.

¶31

2.The Assistant Engineer, Operation and Maintenance, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Muthunaickenpatty, Omalur (TK), Salem - District.

¶32

3.The President, Chellapillai Kuttai Village Panchayat, Chellapillai Kuttai Village, Omalur Taluk, Salem - District.

¶33

+1cc to Mr.D.Balachandran, Advocate SR. No.67236 +1cc to Government Pleader SR. No.67977

¶34

W.P.No.34862 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.35633 of 2019

¶35

PR (22/12/2021)

¶36

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

N.Krishnan v. The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Krishnan v. The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muthulakshmi Vs The District Collector

Sridhar K.Babu Vs The Sub Registrar

Anthony Vs The District Collector

Malladi Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Limited Vs The Union of India

G.Jagannathan Vs The District Revenue Officer

R.Thangavel Vs The District Collector