Partly allowed

K.Radhakrishnan v. The District Registrar

Madras HC24 Feb 2023WP/5494/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging the failure to act on an order cancelling fraudulent documents regarding land earmarked as a public road, the High Court directed the District Registrar to initiate an enquiry within 12 weeks by issuing summons to both the petitioner and private respondents.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st Respondent to act upon the Revenue Divisional Officer's order, issue summons to parties, and pass necessary orders within 12 weeks.

K.Radhakrishnan Vs The District Registrar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.02.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition No.5494 of 2023

K.Radhakrishnan

…. Petitioner

-Vs-

1.The District Registrar District Revenue office JVC Complex Near ICMR Vedanginallur Thiruvallur 602 001

¶11

2.K.Prabhavathiammal

¶12

3.K.M. Santhosh Kumar

¶13

4.V.R.Eswara Rao

¶14

…. Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to cancel the documents as per the order of the Revenue Divisional officer Tiruttani Thiruvallur District vide her proceedings in Na.Ka. 560 / 2020 / A2 dated 25.05.2022 by considering the petitioners representations dated 01.06.2022 and 15.11.2022 within a stipulated time frame as prescribed by this hon'ble Court.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Jayaprakash For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader – for R1 Notice dispensed with – R2 to R4

¶17

1 / 8

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st Respondent to cancel the documents as per the order of the Revenue Divisional officer Tiruttani Thiruvallur District vide her proceedings in Na.Ka. 560 / 2020 / A2 dated 25.05.2022 by considering the petitioners representations dated 01.06.2022 and 15.11.2022 within a stipulated time frame as prescribed by this Court.

¶22

In respect of the land at Survey No.94/1A, Amirthapuram Village, Tiruttani Municipality where there was a lay out called 'Sengunthar Nagar' which was established in 1980, where, as per rules a 20 feet public road has been laid and it has been handed over to the local authorities. However, subsequently some individuals who are the private respondents herein seems to have purchased the property, which, according to the petitioner who is having a plot in the said Nagar, is a fraudulent document. Therefore, in order to cancel the same and to cancel the patta issued in favour of those private individuals, the petitioner being an affected party, had filed a petition before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who, after enquiring the matter, passed a detailed order on 25.05.2022, wherein inter alia he has taken the following decisions.

¶23

2 / 8

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶26

“nkYk; nkw;Fwpg;gpl;Ls;s 20 mo rhiyg;gFjpapy; nkny Fwpg;gplg;gl;Ls;s fpiuak; Mtz';fspd;go tpw;gid bra;ag;gl;Ls;sJk; kw;Wk; mjdog;gilapy; gl;lh bgw;Ws;sJk; bjhlh;ghf chpa Mizfs; tH';fpLkhW gzpt[ld; nfl;Lf;bfhs;fpnwd;

¶27

(1) jpUj;jzp efuhl;rp kidg;gphptpy; br';Fe;jh; efh; kidg;gphptpy; DTCP No.17/1980?d;go m';fPfhpf;fg;gl;l tiug;glj;jpy; 12. 45. 44. 37. 36. 23. 22. 21. Mfpa kidfis xl;o bjw;F g[wkhf xJf;fg;gl;Ls;s 20 mo rhiyg;gFjpapy; cs;s gFjpapid gjpt[ bra;ag;gl;Ls;s brl;oy;bkz;l; fpiuak; kw;Wk; ,ju tif Mtz';fis The Registration (Tamil Nadu Second Amandment) Act 1908?y; cs;s gphpt[ 22(B)(2)?d; go gphpt[ 77A?d; fPH; uj;J bra;tjw;F jpUts;S:h; gjpt[j;Jiw khtl;ll gjpthsUf;F mwpf;if mDg;g[jy;/

¶28

(2) nkw;Fwpg;gplg;gl;Ls;s 20 mo rhiyg;gFjpapy; Vw;gLj;jg;gl;Ls;s fpiua Mtz';fspd; mog;gilapy; tUtha;j;JiwapYk;; gl;lh khWjy; bra;ag;gl;Ls;s gl;lhf;fis bjhlh;g[ila gl;lhjhuhh;fSf;F ,aw;if ePjpapd; mog;gilapy; Kd; mwptpg;g[ tH;';fp. nehpil tprhuiz bra;J tUtha; epiy Miz 31(8)?d; fPH; uj;J bra;jpl eotof;if vLj;jy;/

¶29

(3) nkw;Fwpg;gplg;gl;Ls;s 20 mo rhiyg;gFjpapy; DTCP No.17/1980 m';fPfhpf;fg;gl;Ls;s tiug;glj;jpw;F khwhf mike;Js;s fl;ll';fis 1971 ?Mk; Mz;L jkpH;ehL efh; Cuikg;g[ rl;lg;gphpt[ 47A(4)(b)?d; fPH; nkw;fz;l rl;lg;gphpt[ 47A(4)(d)?d;go jpUj;jzp efuhl;rp Mizah; my;yJ nkw;fz;l rl;lg;gphpt[ 56(1)(b)?d;fPH; jpUts;S:h; kz;ly efh; Cuikg;g[ cjtp ,af;Feh; ,r;rl;lg;gphpt[ 56(d)?d; fPH; mfw;wpl fojk; mDg;g[jy;/

¶30

,j;Jld; ,izg;gpy; fz;l Mtz';fs; ,izj;J mDg;gp itf;fg;gLfpwJ

¶31

3 / 8

¶32

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

¶33

vd;gija[k; gzpt[ld; bjhptpj;Jf;bfhs;fpnwd;/

¶34

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶35

Of these three decisions taken by the Revenue Divisional Officer which have to be implemented by the concerned authorities, insofar as the first decision pertaining to the document made in favour of the private respondents, with respect to the land which has already been earmarked as public road and handed over to the local body, the petitioner had given a representation on 01.06.2022 and 15.11.2022 to the 1^st respondent District Registrar and since he has not considered the same so far, the present writ petition has been filed with the aforesaid prayer.

¶36

Reiterating the aforesaid, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks the indulgence of this Court.

¶37

Heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondent ie., 1^st respondent, who would submit that, insofar as the locus of the petitioner is concerned, it is questionable as he cannot approach this Court as if it is a public cause to take action against the private respondents and without hearing the private respondents, who are the beneficiaries out of the deed that has been registered in their favour, the said document cannot be cancelled by the 1^st respondent. Therefore, the learned Special Government Pleader would

¶38

4 / 8

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶41

oppose the prayer sought for herein.

¶42

In view of the order that is going to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the private respondents is hereby dispensed with.

¶43

Insofar as the public road ie., 20 feet road in the said Sengunthar Nagar is concerned, which is meant for public purpose, as it has to be used as a road by the plot owners and other public, that cannot be converted as plots and if it is converted as plots and sold to these private respondents, that has to be enquired, which in fact has been done by the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned, who passed a detailed order on 25.05.2022 and made recommendations to various authorities including the District Registrar who is the 1^st respondent herein for the cancellation of the document in question made in favour of the private respondents.

¶44

When that being so, in view of the power now vested with the District Registrars under Section 77-A of the Registration Act coupled with Section 22-B of the said Act, the 1^st respondent can very well entertain the direction given by the Revenue Divisional Officer in his order dated 25.05.2022 and accordingly he can issue summons to both petitioner as well as the private respondents herein

¶45

to enquire the matter and to decide as to whether the documents in question

¶46

5 / 8

¶47

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

¶48

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶49

under which the private respondents said to have purchased the property which was originally a public road of 20 feet in the said 'Sengunthar Nagar' and accordingly the issue can be decided by the 1^st respondent on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶50

In that view of the matter, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ

¶51

petition with the following order.

¶52

That there shall be a direction to the 1^st respondent to act upon the first direction or request given by the Revenue Divisional Officer concerned in the order dated 25.05.2022, and

¶53

In this regard, a copy of the said proceedings dated Na.Ka.No.560/2020/A2 dated 25.05.2022 also shall be furnished by the petitioner along with a copy of this order to the 1^st respondent, who, on receipt of the same shall act upon as indicated above, by giving notice to both the petitioner as well as the private respondents and accordingly, after completing the enquiry, shall pass necessary orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 12 (twelve) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶54

6 / 8

¶55

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

¶56

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶57

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶58

24.02.2023

¶59

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order KST To

¶60

The District Registrar District Revenue office JVC Complex Near ICMR Vedanginallur Thiruvallur 602 001

¶61

7 / 8

¶62

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

¶63

W.P.No.5494 of 2023

¶64

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶65

KST

¶66

W.P.No. 5494 of 2023

¶67

24.02.2023

¶68

8 / 8

¶69

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

K.Radhakrishnan v. The District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Radhakrishnan 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

L.Mahendiran Vs The Secretary to Government

Amutha Vs The District Registrar

Munusamy Vs The Revenue Divisional officer

P.John Selvaraj Vs The Managing Director

Rahmath Beevi Vs The Special Deputy Collector

Karthikeyan Vs The District Collector