High Court · 2025

Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 28.07.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHReview Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025N.JayalakshmiW/o.(Late) NatarajanPetitionerVs1.S.MeenakshiW/o.Srinivasan2.The District Collector,Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.3.Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO),South Chennai at Guindy,Chennai - 600 032.4.The Tahsildar,Alandur Taluk Office,St.Thomas Mount,Chennai - 600 016.5.The Inspector General of Registration,100, Santhome High Road,Mandavelipakkam,Raja Annamalaipuram,Chennai - 600 028.6.The District Registrar (Admin),1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025South Chennai, Integrated Building of Registration andCommercial Tax,Veterinary Hospital Road, Nandanam,Chennai - 600 035.7.The Sub Registrar,Alandur SRO, St.Thomas Mount,Chennai - 600 016.8.BhuvaneshwariW/o.Sundar9.SundarS/o.Venkatramani10.S.Sri KrishnaS/o.Sundar11.S.AmruthaD/o.SundarRespondentsReview Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code read with Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 25.03.2025 in W.P.No.6578 of 2025.For Petitioner: Mrs.N.Kavitha RameshwarFor Respondents: Mr.T.Ramachandran [R1] Mr.E.Vijay Anand, Additional Government Pleader [R2 to R4] Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu Additional Government Pleader [R5 to R7]*****2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025O R D E RThis review application has been filed to review the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6578 of 2025 dated 25.03.2025.2. The first respondent/writ petitioner filed W.P.No.6578 of 2025 challenging the cancellation of the Settlement Deed executed in favour of the writ petitioner by the seventh respondent on 20.12.2024 registered as document No.5609 of 2024 and the consequent settlement deed dated 20.12.2024 executed in favour of respondents 10 and 11 by the seventh respondent and to declare the same as null and void.3. Heard Mrs.N.Kavitha Rameshwar, learned counsel for petitioner, Mr.T.Ramachandran, learned counsel for first respondent, Mr.E.Vijay Anand, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 2 to 4 and Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 5 to 7.4. This Court interfered with the cancellation of the settlement deed executed in favour of the writ petitioner and the subsequent settlement deed executed in favour of the respondents 10 and 11 by the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025seventh respondent only by relying upon the judgment of the Full Bench in Sasikala v. Revenue Divisional Officer cum Sub Collector, Devakottai & others [2022 (5) CTC 257].5. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submitted that earlier the review petitioner had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer for cancellation of the settlement deed under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 and the same was rejected and it was confirmed by the order passed by the District Collector dated 08.08.2022. Aggrieved by the same, the review petitioner filed W.P.No.9317 of 2023 before this Court challenging the order passed by the District Collector and for a direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer to cancel the settlement deed dated 06.10.2015. This writ petition was disposed of by giving a specific finding that the document in question viz., the settlement deed dated 06.10.2015 is in the nature of a Will and that no right or title had flowed to the writ petitioner by virtue of this document. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submitted that pursuant to the order passed in the writ petition on 13.12.2024, the review petitioner proceeded to revoke the settlement deed executed in favour of the writ petitioner on 20.12.2024 and 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025executed a fresh settlement deed in favour of respondents 10 and 11 on 20.12.2024. This earlier order passed in W.P.No.9317 of 2023 was not considered while passing final orders in W.P.No.6578 of 2025 and hence, there is an error apparent on the face of the order.6. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent/writ petitioner submitted that the above fact was brought to the notice of this Court and the relevant order passed in W.P.No.9317 of 2023 dated 13.12.2024 formed part of the typed-set of papers and only after noticing the said order, final orders were passed in W.P.No.6578 of 2025. Hence, it was contended that the order does not suffer from any error apparent on the face of the record and the order passed in the writ petition need not be reviewed.7. In the considered view of this Court, when final orders were passed in W.P.No.6578 of 2025 dated 25.03.2025, this Court did not bestow its attention to the earlier order passed in W.P.No.9317 of 2023 dated 13.12.2024. This order has a direct bearing on the issue raised by the writ petitioner. By virtue of this order, the learned Single Judge of this Court has virtually declared the settlement deed dated 06.10.2025 as 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025a Will even though it carried the nomenclature of a settlement deed. Learned Single Judge has held that no right or title has flowed in favour of the writ petitioner by the execution of the document. In the strength of this observation made by the learned Single Judge, the review petitioner has proceeded to cancel the earlier settlement deed by treating it as a Will and has executed a fresh settlement deed in favour of respondents 10 and 11. By not referring to this order and its impact on the cancellation of the settlement deed, the order passed in W.P.No.6578 of 2025 dated 25.03.2025, certainly suffers from error apparent on the face of the record. Hence, the order passed in the writ petition has to be reviewed and the writ petition must be revived and has to be heard afresh.8. In the light of the above discussion, the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.6578 of 2025 dated 25.03.2025 is reviewed and the said order is recalled. Accordingly, this review application is allowed and the writ petition is restored back to file to be heard afresh after giving opportunity to both sides. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025Post the writ petition for hearing on 13.08.2025 before the concerned Portfolio Jude dealing with registration cases.28.07.2025Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: Yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdergmTo1.The District Collector,Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.2.Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO),South Chennai at Guindy,Chennai - 600 032.3.The Tahsildar,Alandur Taluk Office,St.Thomas Mount,Chennai - 600 016.4.The Inspector General of Registration,100, Santhome High Road,Mandavelipakkam,Raja Annamalaipuram,Chennai - 600 028.5.The District Registrar (Admin),South Chennai, Integrated Building of Registration andCommercial Tax,Veterinary Hospital Road, Nandanam,Chennai - 600 035.6.The Sub Registrar,Alandur SRO, St.Thomas Mount,Chennai - 600 016.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Application (Writ) No.155 of 2025N.ANAND VENKATESH, JgmReview Application (Writ) No.155 of 202528.07.20258/8