High Court · 2025
Case Details
Acts & Sections
Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 06.10.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESHContempt Petition No.2004 of 2025Valli.. PetitionerVs.Mr.BalasubramanianRevenue TahsildarTaluk Office, PerambalurPerambalur .. RespondentContempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P.No.3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025.For Petitioner : Mr.S.R.Raghunathan for Mr.A.Arun KumarFor Respondent: Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader O R D E RThe contempt petition was filed on the alleged disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025.2. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court in the following 1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025terms:“2. When the matter came up for hearing on 10.02.2025, this Court, on going through the records, found that the Tahsildar has already passed an order dated 09.04.2010 transferring patta in the name of the petitioner. Thereafter, there was no progress and therefore, this Court directed the learned Special Government Pleader to take instructions as to what transpired after the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. 3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned Special Government Pleader produced written instructions from the third respondent. On going through the same, it is seen that various sub-divisions have taken place and therefore, in order to transfer the patta now in the name of the petitioner, a survey has to be conducted and thereafter, on identifying the sub-division and the extent, patta will be issued in favour of the petitioner.4. Considering the written instructions received from the third respondent and also other materials placed before this Court, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to complete the entire process within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and issue patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the sub-divided property to which the petitioner is claiming ownership and title.”3. When this contempt petition was taken up for hearing on 01.08.2025, this Court passed the following order:“When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the affidavit of the respondent was placed before this Court. Apart from other things, the respondent has taken the following stand :“g. It is also submitted that the Respondent has found out a patent defect in the then proceedings issued by the then Tahsildar on 09.04.2010. In the said proceedings it has been stated that then Tahsildar has issued the legal heirship Certificate for Late.Selladhurai, S/o.Sellan even during the year 2010. Per contra for Selladhurai who has died on 19.07.1988 at Govindampalayam, Legal heirship Certificate has been issued 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025by the Jurisdictional Tahsildar, Thalaivasal Taluk on 21.01.2025. Furthermore the Respondent on detailed examination of the Records of the Taluk Office has observed that the Impugned Order Submitted by the petitioning in File No.A2/3829/2010 issued by the then Tahsildar pertains to A2 Section. However the said file has been closed from A4 section on 07.06.2010 subsequently as per Personal Register. Hence the Respondent has observed and that the then Proceedings of the Tahsildar dt.09.04.2010 is a bogus one. It is further respectfully submitted that it is learnt from the impugned proceedings copy submitted by the petitioner, the file number is mentioned as 3829-2010 and date of order passed on 09.04.2010. On perusal of Distribution register for the year 2010, it is found that the number 3829 was allocated to "A4" seat assistant on 18.05.2010. Hence, before the date of allocation of the number from Distribution Register, the number 3829 is used in the impugned order. Therefore, the respondent has observed that the impugned order is a bogus one.”2. The order was passed in the writ petition mainly relying upon the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 of the Tahsildar. However, a stand has now been taken to the effect that the so-called proceedings dated 09.04.2010 is a forged document and it is a bogus one. A copy of the said affidavit has been served on the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall take instructions in this case.4. Post on 08.08.2025 at 02.15 P.M.”4. The contempt petition was again listed for hearing on 25.08.2025. On that day, original records were placed before this Court by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent. On going through the same, this Court passed the following order on 25.08.2025 :“When the matter was taken up for hearing today, all the original records were placed before this Court. On going through the 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025same, it is seen that the proceedings in question do not pertain to Perambalur, but has been mentioned as Elambalur Village. The respondent is seriously disputing the genuineness of the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. 2. On the other hand, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the original proceedings of the Tahsildar is available with the petitioner and there is no need for the petitioner to rely upon any bogus proceedings, since the title is traced from the year 1908 onwards. 3. This Court, exercising its contempt jurisdiction, cannot get into this issue. However, considering the seriousness of the allegation made, this Court deems it fit to direct the District Collector, Perambalur to conduct an enquiry in this case by calling for all the original records and providing opportunity to the petitioner. Such an enquiry shall be completed within a period of four weeks. A report shall be placed before this Court on the genuineness of the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 of the Tahsildar, Based on the same, further orders will be passed in this contempt petition. 3. Post this contempt petition under the caption 'for passing further orders' on 06.10.2025 at 2.15 p.m.“5. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the District Collector, Perambalur, conducted an enquiry.6. The learned counsel for the petitioner filed an affidavit sworn to by the petitioner. The petitioner is also present in person before the Court. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder :“2. I tender my unconditional apology to this Hon'ble Court. 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025I have not applied any deliberate fraud before this Hon'ble Court. Based on the order passed by this Hon'ble Court on 25.08.2025, the District Collector conducted an enquiry on 03.09.2025 and informed orally that the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010 bearing reference No Mu.Mu. A2/3829/2010 is not genuine. The said writ petition was filed based on the proceedings of the Tahsildar order dated 09.04.2010.3. 1 submit that my application was submitted to the tahsildar on 08.10.2009 pursuant to which enquiry was conducted and the said order was given to me. Since now it is informed by the District Collector that the order is not genuine, I tender unconditional apology and it is not my intention to cheat or play fraud before this Hon'ble Court. I believe the order to be true.4. I submit that I trace title to the property as a legal heir to my husband who inherited the property from his father who purchased the property in the year 1908 and the patta was mutated in my father-in-law's name. During enquiry I submitted these details. However, the District Collector informed me that the scope of the enquiry is strictly restricted to the genuineness of the Tahsildar proceedings dated 09.04.2010.5. I further submit that I was directed by the District Collector to submit independent applications with regard to my other grievances. Therefore, I submitted an application to probe the existence of file in T.K.No. 8A.179/1419 on 07.09.2025 and an application for mutation of patta with regard to the subject property on 18.09.2025. There has been no update regarding both the applications yet.6. In light of the information passed by the District Collector that such an order is not in existence, I request this Hon'ble Court to recall the order passed in W.P.No. 3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025, keeping my right to open to approach the authorities concerned for mutation of revenue records.”7. The learned Special Government Pleader also produced the proceedings of the District Collector dated 03.10.2025 and the relevant potions are extracted hereunder :5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20256/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20258. What is evident from the above affidavit filed by the petitioner and also the proceedings of the District Collector, Perambalur, dated 03.10.2025 is that the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Perambalur, made in Mu.Mu. A2/3829/2010 dated 09.04.2010, has been found to be fabricated document.7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20259. The petitioner, in the affidavit filed before this Court today, has tendered unconditional apology and she has taken a stand that she never intended to cheat or play fraud before this court, since the petitioner was tracing right and title over the property from 1908 onwards. Now, the petitioner has been informed that the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 is not a genuine document.10. The order was passed in the writ petition by relying upon the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. It has now come to light that the proceedings is a false and fabricated document. Hence, the order passed in the writ petition dated 03.03.2025, is hereby recalled. The apology tendered by the petitioner is also accepted. It is left open to the petitioner to workout her remedy in the manner known to law.This Contempt Petition is accordingly closed. 06.10.2025Index : Yes/NoNeutral Citation : Yes/Nogya8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.gyaCont. Petn. No.2004 of 202506.10.20259/9
Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 06.10.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESHContempt Petition No.2004 of 2025Valli.. PetitionerVs.Mr.BalasubramanianRevenue TahsildarTaluk Office, PerambalurPerambalur .. RespondentContempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P.No.3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025.For Petitioner : Mr.S.R.Raghunathan for Mr.A.Arun KumarFor Respondent: Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader O R D E RThe contempt petition was filed on the alleged disobedience of the order passed in W.P.No.3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025.2. The writ petition was disposed of by this Court in the following 1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025terms:“2. When the matter came up for hearing on 10.02.2025, this Court, on going through the records, found that the Tahsildar has already passed an order dated 09.04.2010 transferring patta in the name of the petitioner. Thereafter, there was no progress and therefore, this Court directed the learned Special Government Pleader to take instructions as to what transpired after the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. 3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, learned Special Government Pleader produced written instructions from the third respondent. On going through the same, it is seen that various sub-divisions have taken place and therefore, in order to transfer the patta now in the name of the petitioner, a survey has to be conducted and thereafter, on identifying the sub-division and the extent, patta will be issued in favour of the petitioner.4. Considering the written instructions received from the third respondent and also other materials placed before this Court, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to complete the entire process within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and issue patta in the name of the petitioner with respect to the sub-divided property to which the petitioner is claiming ownership and title.”3. When this contempt petition was taken up for hearing on 01.08.2025, this Court passed the following order:“When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the affidavit of the respondent was placed before this Court. Apart from other things, the respondent has taken the following stand :“g. It is also submitted that the Respondent has found out a patent defect in the then proceedings issued by the then Tahsildar on 09.04.2010. In the said proceedings it has been stated that then Tahsildar has issued the legal heirship Certificate for Late.Selladhurai, S/o.Sellan even during the year 2010. Per contra for Selladhurai who has died on 19.07.1988 at Govindampalayam, Legal heirship Certificate has been issued 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025by the Jurisdictional Tahsildar, Thalaivasal Taluk on 21.01.2025. Furthermore the Respondent on detailed examination of the Records of the Taluk Office has observed that the Impugned Order Submitted by the petitioning in File No.A2/3829/2010 issued by the then Tahsildar pertains to A2 Section. However the said file has been closed from A4 section on 07.06.2010 subsequently as per Personal Register. Hence the Respondent has observed and that the then Proceedings of the Tahsildar dt.09.04.2010 is a bogus one. It is further respectfully submitted that it is learnt from the impugned proceedings copy submitted by the petitioner, the file number is mentioned as 3829-2010 and date of order passed on 09.04.2010. On perusal of Distribution register for the year 2010, it is found that the number 3829 was allocated to "A4" seat assistant on 18.05.2010. Hence, before the date of allocation of the number from Distribution Register, the number 3829 is used in the impugned order. Therefore, the respondent has observed that the impugned order is a bogus one.”2. The order was passed in the writ petition mainly relying upon the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 of the Tahsildar. However, a stand has now been taken to the effect that the so-called proceedings dated 09.04.2010 is a forged document and it is a bogus one. A copy of the said affidavit has been served on the learned counsel for the petitioner.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall take instructions in this case.4. Post on 08.08.2025 at 02.15 P.M.”4. The contempt petition was again listed for hearing on 25.08.2025. On that day, original records were placed before this Court by the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent. On going through the same, this Court passed the following order on 25.08.2025 :“When the matter was taken up for hearing today, all the original records were placed before this Court. On going through the 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025same, it is seen that the proceedings in question do not pertain to Perambalur, but has been mentioned as Elambalur Village. The respondent is seriously disputing the genuineness of the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. 2. On the other hand, the learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the original proceedings of the Tahsildar is available with the petitioner and there is no need for the petitioner to rely upon any bogus proceedings, since the title is traced from the year 1908 onwards. 3. This Court, exercising its contempt jurisdiction, cannot get into this issue. However, considering the seriousness of the allegation made, this Court deems it fit to direct the District Collector, Perambalur to conduct an enquiry in this case by calling for all the original records and providing opportunity to the petitioner. Such an enquiry shall be completed within a period of four weeks. A report shall be placed before this Court on the genuineness of the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 of the Tahsildar, Based on the same, further orders will be passed in this contempt petition. 3. Post this contempt petition under the caption 'for passing further orders' on 06.10.2025 at 2.15 p.m.“5. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that pursuant to the directions issued by this Court, the District Collector, Perambalur, conducted an enquiry.6. The learned counsel for the petitioner filed an affidavit sworn to by the petitioner. The petitioner is also present in person before the Court. The relevant portions are extracted hereunder :“2. I tender my unconditional apology to this Hon'ble Court. 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025I have not applied any deliberate fraud before this Hon'ble Court. Based on the order passed by this Hon'ble Court on 25.08.2025, the District Collector conducted an enquiry on 03.09.2025 and informed orally that the order passed by the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010 bearing reference No Mu.Mu. A2/3829/2010 is not genuine. The said writ petition was filed based on the proceedings of the Tahsildar order dated 09.04.2010.3. 1 submit that my application was submitted to the tahsildar on 08.10.2009 pursuant to which enquiry was conducted and the said order was given to me. Since now it is informed by the District Collector that the order is not genuine, I tender unconditional apology and it is not my intention to cheat or play fraud before this Hon'ble Court. I believe the order to be true.4. I submit that I trace title to the property as a legal heir to my husband who inherited the property from his father who purchased the property in the year 1908 and the patta was mutated in my father-in-law's name. During enquiry I submitted these details. However, the District Collector informed me that the scope of the enquiry is strictly restricted to the genuineness of the Tahsildar proceedings dated 09.04.2010.5. I further submit that I was directed by the District Collector to submit independent applications with regard to my other grievances. Therefore, I submitted an application to probe the existence of file in T.K.No. 8A.179/1419 on 07.09.2025 and an application for mutation of patta with regard to the subject property on 18.09.2025. There has been no update regarding both the applications yet.6. In light of the information passed by the District Collector that such an order is not in existence, I request this Hon'ble Court to recall the order passed in W.P.No. 3955 of 2025 dated 03.03.2025, keeping my right to open to approach the authorities concerned for mutation of revenue records.”7. The learned Special Government Pleader also produced the proceedings of the District Collector dated 03.10.2025 and the relevant potions are extracted hereunder :5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20256/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20258. What is evident from the above affidavit filed by the petitioner and also the proceedings of the District Collector, Perambalur, dated 03.10.2025 is that the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Perambalur, made in Mu.Mu. A2/3829/2010 dated 09.04.2010, has been found to be fabricated document.7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 20259. The petitioner, in the affidavit filed before this Court today, has tendered unconditional apology and she has taken a stand that she never intended to cheat or play fraud before this court, since the petitioner was tracing right and title over the property from 1908 onwards. Now, the petitioner has been informed that the proceedings dated 09.04.2010 is not a genuine document.10. The order was passed in the writ petition by relying upon the proceedings of the Tahsildar dated 09.04.2010. It has now come to light that the proceedings is a false and fabricated document. Hence, the order passed in the writ petition dated 03.03.2025, is hereby recalled. The apology tendered by the petitioner is also accepted. It is left open to the petitioner to workout her remedy in the manner known to law.This Contempt Petition is accordingly closed. 06.10.2025Index : Yes/NoNeutral Citation : Yes/Nogya8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont. P. No.2004 of 2025N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.gyaCont. Petn. No.2004 of 202506.10.20259/9