Disposed

Arulmigu Moorthiyan-Sri Chathirapilliyar v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC30 Mar 2023CRL RC/116/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment disposes of a criminal revision and connected contempt petition. Holding that the civil court has taken cognizance of the title dispute, the High Court refrains from interfering with the Executive Magistrate's order maintaining status quo, directing parties to seek remedies in the pending civil suit.

What did the court decide?

The criminal revision case is disposed of; connected criminal miscellaneous petitions and the contempt petition are closed. Parties directed to approach the civil court for remedies.

Arulmigu Moorthiyan-Sri Chathirapilliyar Vs the Sub… — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 30.03.2023

¶4

CORAM: JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE

¶5

Criminal Revision Case No.116 of 2022, Crl.M.P. Nos.1142, 3023 & 3777 of 2022 and Contempt Petition No.1087 of 2022

¶6

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022

¶7

Arulmigu Moorthiyan - Sri Chathirapilliyar, Sri Penthoziyamman Worshippers Association and Dharmathya Beneficiaries Organisation of Panayadi Village Rep. by its President R.Kolajinathan S/o.Renganathan Middle Street Panaiyadi Village Udayarpalayam Taluk Ariyalur District

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Sub-Divisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur District

¶11

2.Inspector of Police T.Palur Police Station Ariyalur District

¶12

3.Ramesh 4.Rajesh 5.Shanmugam

¶13

6.Mahendiran

¶14

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

¶15

_________ Page 1 of 6_

¶16

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶17

7.Senguttuvan

¶18

8.Venkatesh

¶19

9.Magesh

¶20

... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER: Criminal Revision Case filed under Sections 397 & 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records of the order passed by the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Ariyalur District in M.C. No.02 of 2021/A3 dated 27.10.2021 and set aside the same.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Balu For Respondents : Mr.G.R.Lakshmanan for R3 to R9

¶23

Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶24

1.S.Ramesh 2.B.Rajesh 3.K.Shanmugam 4.N.Mahendiran 5.S.Senguttuvan 6.D.Venkatesh 7.S.Magesh ... Petitioners Vs. R.Kolajinathan ... Respondent

¶25

PRAYER: Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act for willfully and deliberately misleading this Hon'ble Court to get

¶26

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

¶27

Page 2 of 6

¶28

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶29

favourable interim orders in Crl. M.P.No.1142 of 2022 in Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 dated 10.02.2022 and also for perjury of the order.

¶30

For Petitioners : Mr.G.R.Lakshmanan For Respondent : Mr.K.Balu

¶31

COMMON ORDER

¶32

The revision petitioner is a third party to certain proceedings of the Subdivisional Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Udayarpalayam Taluk, Ariyalur District in M.C. No.02 of 2021/A3 dated 27.10.2021 initiated in favour of 'B' Party. The said proceedings is under challenge in this revision.

¶33

When the criminal revision case was moved, this court passed an order granting interim stay till 15.03.2022. Now, the respondents 3 to 9 in Criminal revision case have come before this court with this contempt petition on the allegation that the revision petitioner has wilfully and deliberately misled the court in obtaining the interim order in Crl. M.P. No.1142 of 2022 dated 10.02.2022 and also for perjury and seeks a direction from this court to initiate action for contempt.

¶34

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

¶35

_________ Page 3 of 6_

¶36

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶37

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that in the proceedings initiated under Section 145 Cr.P.C. in question, these respondents were arrayed as 'B' party and an order was passed in their favour.

¶38

In the meantime, this court understands that the revision petitioner has laid O.S. No.122 of 2021 before Sub Court, Jayamkondam, for declaration of title that the property in question belonged to Arulmigu Moorthiyan Sri Chathirapilliyar Temple. The suit is pending.

¶39

Inasmuch as the civil court has taken cognizance of the dispute as to the title of the property, this court does not consider it proper even to interfere with the order of the Executive Magistrate. Indeed, a perusal of the impugned order of the Executive Magistrate only discloses that the said order was passed on the basis of certain prima facie impression gathered by the Executive Magistrate from the facts placed before him, but the learned Executive Magistrate has underscored that the said order would be subject to the outcome of the suit.

¶40

Inasmuch as the order of the Executive Magistrate is only an order to maintain status quo without getting into the title dispute between the parties, it

¶41

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

¶42

Page 4 of 6

¶43

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶44

is only proper from now onwards, the civil court concerned shall deal with the rival contention of the parties. All the issues raised before this court are left open for the civil court to decide and whichever party is in need of a remedy, may approach the civil court where the original suit is now pending for any remedy that they intend to obtain.

¶45

With the above direction, the criminal revision case is disposed of. Consequently, the connected criminal miscellaneous petitions and the contempt petition are closed.

¶46

30.03.2023

¶47

Asr

¶48

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _________ Page 5 of 6_

¶49

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022 & Cont. Petn. No.1087 of 2022

¶50

N.SESHASAYEE, J.,

¶51

Asr

¶52

Crl. R.C. No.116 of 2022, Crl.M.P. Nos.1142, 3023 & 3777 of 2022 and Contempt Petition No.1087 of 2022

¶53

30.03.2023

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis _________ Page 6 of 6_

Arulmigu Moorthiyan-Sri Chathirapilliyar v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arulmigu Moorthiyan-Sri Chathirapilliyar v. the Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Revenue Divisional Officer

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

Dhanalakshmi Vs Muniammal

Seenu Gounder Vs Anandhan

Maniammal Vs Anandhan

Sambavi Vs G.Santharam

The Superintending Engineer Vs M/.Ambica Gen Power

Lakshmi Vs Meenakshi Ammal (Deceased)