Dismissed

K.M.P.Shankaran v. The District Registrar

Madras HC29 Sept 2022WP/16759/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking quashing of an enquiry notice, the Court, despite concurrent litigation in the civil court regarding the same sales deeds, directed the petitioner to cooperate with the pending civil trial without adjournments and set aside the parallel complaint and the resulting notice.

What did the court decide?

The complaint and the impugned notice of enquiry dated 28.07.2021 were set aside; the petitioner was directed to cooperate with the trial in O.S.No.252 of 2018.

K.M.P.Shankaran Vs The District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 29.09.2022

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.16759 of 2021 and

¶7

W.M.P.Nos.17723, 17722 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.22119 of 2022

¶8

K.M.P.Shankaran ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The District Registrar, Salem (West), Office of the District Collector, Salem District, Salem.

¶11

V.Saravanan

¶12

S.Natarajan ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records to the proceedings of the first respondent dated 28.07.2021 in Na.Ka.No.2323/E4/2021 and quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : M/s.K.Selvaraj

¶15

For R1 : Mr.E.Vijay Anand Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.P.Mathivanan

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

1/6

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of

¶21

Certiorari, to quash the proceedings of the first respondent dated 28.07.2021 in Na.Ka.No.2323/E4/2021.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that he purchased the properties in S.No.11/1 of an extent of 53 hectares out of 1 acre 31 cents by virtue of Sale Deed dated 04.07.2016 and another property of an extent of 53.03 hectares out of 1 acre 31 cents in the above said survey number vide Sale Deed dated 02.11.2016. Thereafter, the second respondent fabricated two sale deeds and clandestinely obtained the signature of the petitioner. Aggrieved over the said act, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.327 of 2017, before the III Additional District Munsif, Salem, to declare the above said Sale Deeds executed by the second respondent as null and void. In the year 2018, the third respondent along with his brothers filed a suit in O.S.No.252 of 2018, on the file of I Additional District Court, Salem against the petitioner's vendor namely Sakthivel, petitioner and others to declare the sale deeds of the petitioner and other documents as null and void. When the above said suits are pending for adjudication, the third respondent had given a complaint dated 29.03.2021, before the first respondent seeking to cancel the Sale Deeds of the petitioner https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

2/6

¶24

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

¶25

as well as others, pursuant to which the first respondent issued notice of

¶26

enquiry dated 28.07.2021, to the petitioner to appear for enquiry on

¶27

02.08.2021. Challenging the said notice dated 28.07.2021, passed by the first respondent, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition seeking the aforesaid relief.

¶28

3 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the suit filed by the third respondent against the petitioner in O.S.No.252 of 2018 is pending on the file of I Additional District Court, Salem, the third respondent had again given a parallel complaint dated 29.03.2021, before the first respondent in respect of the very same cause of action which is not sustainable. Accordingly, he prayed for quashment of the impugned notice dated 28.07.2021.

¶29

Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first

¶30

respondent submitted that based on the complaint given by the third respondent dated 29.03.2021, the petitioner was called for enquiry with all the necessary documents vide notice dated 28.07.2021.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for third respondent submitted that

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

3/6

¶34

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

¶35

though the suit in O.S.No.252 of 2018 was posted for trial in the year 2018, the petitioner has not come forward to co-operate with the trial and there was no progress in the trial. However, he fairly conceded that this Court may quash the complaint dated 29.03.2021, given by the third respondent and consequently direct the petitioner to co-operate with the trial pending on the file of I Additional District Court, Salem.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶37

Though very many contentions have been advanced, however, it

¶38

is the claim of the third respondent that though the suit in O.S.No.252 of 2018 on the file of I Additional District Court, Salem was posted for trial in the year 2018, the petitioner has not come forward to co-operate with the trial and there was no progress in the trial. In such view of the matter, this Court without going into the merits of the issue is inclined to dispose of the present Writ Petition with the following directions:

¶39

(i) The petitioner is directed to co-operate with the trial of the above said suit in O.S.No.252 of 2018 pending on the file of I Additional District

¶40

Court, Salem without getting any frequent adjournment.

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

4/6

¶43

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

¶44

(ii) The complaint dated 29.03.2021 given by the third respondent is set aside consequently the impugned notice dated 28.07.2021 issued by the first respondent is set aside.

¶45

(iii) The trial Court / I Additional District Court, Salem is directed to decide the dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent without being influenced by the observation made in this order and in the impugned notice dated 28.07.2021 issued by the first respondent within the period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶46

29.09.2022

¶47

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non speaking order : Yes / No RAP

¶48

To The District Registrar, Salem (West), Office of the District Collector, Salem District, Salem.

¶49

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5/6

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

RAP

W.P.No.16759 of 2021

¶55

29.09.2022

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶57

6/6

K.M.P.Shankaran v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.M.P.Shankaran v. The District Registrar

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

R.Rajaramanan Vs The Sub-Collector

P.Velumani, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

R.Jeyachandran Vs State of Tamilnadu

M.Annadurai Vs The Tahsildar

N.Palanisami Vs The Tahsildar

Krishnasamy @ Kistappa Naicker Vs the Special Commissioner and