High Court · 2025
Case Details
W.A.No.3090 of 2021IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 09.09.2025CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAMANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANANW.A.No.3090 of 2021andCMP.No.21424 of 2021The Managing DirectorM/s.Standard Fire Works (P) Ltd1/3 Thiruthangl Road,Madurai District....AppellantVs.1.KanthaBai2.Usha3.B.Shankar4.B.Giridharan5.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.6.The Settlement Officer, Office of the Settlement Offier, Survey and settlement Department, Survey House, Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600 005. 7.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kancheepuram District - 631 501.1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20218.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Kanchepuram District - 631 501.9.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chingleput, Kancheepuram District-603 001.10.The Tahsildar (Additional Headquarters) Tiruporur Taluk, Tiruporur, Kancheepuram District - 603 110....Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Appeal has been filed under Section 15 of Letter patent against the order of this Court dated 01.10.2021 made in W.P.No.18362 of 2018. For Appellant: Mr.AR.RamanathanFor Respondent: Mrs.G.ThilagavathiNos.2 and 3 Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Kanagasundaram For Respondent: Mr.B.SivaramanNos.1 and 4For Respondent: No appearanceNos.5 to 10JUDGMENT(The judgment of this Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam,J.,)The present intra-court appeal, on hand, has been instituted to assail the order dated 01.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.18362 of 2018.2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20212.The 7th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant before this Court. The respondents 1 to 4 herein instituted writ proceedings challenging the order of the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram dated 09.06.2018, wherein, the respondents 1 to 4 claimed right over the subject property described in the writ proceedings, 3.Per contra, the appellant herein also claims right over the subject property mainly on the ground that the Tahsildar has assigned the land originally in favour of the vendor’s pre-decessor to the appellant and the appellant purchased thereafter. When the appellant and the respondents 1 to 4 claimed right over the subject property, the District Revenue Officer adjudicated the issues. 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 contended that the Tahsildar had passed the order of assignment during the ban period in his personal capacity and therefore, the assignment itself is suspicious.3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20215. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would oppose by stating that civil suit in O.S.No.332 of 2017 has been instituted for permanent injunction and pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, at Chengalpattu. 6.The order of the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram, dated 09.06.2018 shows that there are suspicious circumstances in respect of the patta held by the appellant. Therefore, a thorough investigation and enquiry needs to be undertaken. Under those circumstances, the claim of the respondents 1 to 4 was also negatived. In para 11 of the order, the District Revenue Officer has stated that the present patta held by Tvl.Standard Fire Works Company Limited, though they claim that they are enjoying the land based on proper title deeds and patta, the matter needs thorough investigation and enquiry, since the land is classified as Anadeenam in the year 1961 settlement Register. The transactions pertaining to the land from 1961 to till date i.e for 57 years, and the revenue records mutations occurred during the above period are also to be thoroghly enquired before arriving at a decision on the allegations levelled by the respondents 1 to 4. The District Revenue Officer has not 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021adjudicated those allegations in view of the fact that he has negatived the claim of the respondents 1 to 4 and the appellant herein filed a civil suit for permanent injunction. However, the District Revenue Officer has directed the Tahsildar, Tiruporur, to submit a detailed report after finalisation of the civil suit. 7.This Court is of the considered view that civil suit is only for permanent injunction. The document produced by the appellant and the respondents 1 to 4 are found to be suspicious. As per the settlement register, the subject land has been classified as “Anadeenam” and several other revenue records needs to be verified. The property situates at Pudupakkam, Thiruporur Taluk, Sub-Urban to Chennai City. The land value in that locality is sky-rocketing. Therefore, it is just and necessary to conduct an ellobrate enquiry into the allegations raised by the respondents 1 to 4 and findout whether the subject land is a patta land or Government land. 8.The High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry, since the allegations require verification of revenue records and production of 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021documents by the respective parties. Disputed facts are to be adjudicated by the competent authority. In the present case, the District Revenue Officer, though formed an opinion that the documents produced are suspicious in nature, he has arrived at a conclusion that the respondents 1 to 4 are not entitled for any relief. But the allegations against the appellant also considered as serious in nature. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the Commissioner of Land Administration has to conduct a detailed enquiry for arriving at a conclusion and to pass appropriate orders. Since the land is a valuble land and suspicion is, whether the land belongs to the Government or patta land, the pendency of a suit is not a bar for adjudication of the issues with reference to the revenue records by the Commissioner of Land Administration. It is just and necessary to verify the geniunity of the patta granted in favour of the parties. The genesis and the basis are to be verified in the context of the revenue records and other documents available. 9.In view of the facts and circumstances, the 5th respondent The Additional Chief Secretary /Commissioner of Land Administration, 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai, is directed to issue notice to all the parties, who all are necessary parties for effective adjudication of issues, conduct an enquiry by calling for the original records and by affording an opportunity to the parties and decide the issues on merits and in accordance with law. If it is found that the subject property is Government land, swift actions are to be initiated to resume the public property by following the procedures as contemplated under law. The Commissioner of Land Administration is requested to expedite the enquiry and complete the same as expeditiously as possible. With these observations, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.J) (C.S.N.J) 09.09.2025Index : Yes/NoInternet : Yes/NoSpeaking order/Non-Speaking orderNeutral Citation : Yes/Nosms7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021To1.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.2.The Settlement Officer, Office of the Settlement Offier, Survey and settlement Department, Survey House, Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600 005. 3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kancheepuram District - 631 501.4.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Kanchepuram District - 631 501.5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chingleput, Kancheepuram District-603 001.6.The Tahsildar (Additional Headquarters) Tiruporur Taluk, Tiruporur, Kancheepuram District - 603 110.8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,andC.SARAVANAN,J.,smsW.A.No.3090 of 2021andCMP.No.21424 of 202109.09.20259/9
W.A.No.3090 of 2021IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 09.09.2025CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAMANDTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANANW.A.No.3090 of 2021andCMP.No.21424 of 2021The Managing DirectorM/s.Standard Fire Works (P) Ltd1/3 Thiruthangl Road,Madurai District....AppellantVs.1.KanthaBai2.Usha3.B.Shankar4.B.Giridharan5.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.6.The Settlement Officer, Office of the Settlement Offier, Survey and settlement Department, Survey House, Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600 005. 7.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kancheepuram District - 631 501.1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20218.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Kanchepuram District - 631 501.9.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chingleput, Kancheepuram District-603 001.10.The Tahsildar (Additional Headquarters) Tiruporur Taluk, Tiruporur, Kancheepuram District - 603 110....Respondents PRAYER: The Writ Appeal has been filed under Section 15 of Letter patent against the order of this Court dated 01.10.2021 made in W.P.No.18362 of 2018. For Appellant: Mr.AR.RamanathanFor Respondent: Mrs.G.ThilagavathiNos.2 and 3 Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Kanagasundaram For Respondent: Mr.B.SivaramanNos.1 and 4For Respondent: No appearanceNos.5 to 10JUDGMENT(The judgment of this Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam,J.,)The present intra-court appeal, on hand, has been instituted to assail the order dated 01.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.18362 of 2018.2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20212.The 7th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant before this Court. The respondents 1 to 4 herein instituted writ proceedings challenging the order of the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram dated 09.06.2018, wherein, the respondents 1 to 4 claimed right over the subject property described in the writ proceedings, 3.Per contra, the appellant herein also claims right over the subject property mainly on the ground that the Tahsildar has assigned the land originally in favour of the vendor’s pre-decessor to the appellant and the appellant purchased thereafter. When the appellant and the respondents 1 to 4 claimed right over the subject property, the District Revenue Officer adjudicated the issues. 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 contended that the Tahsildar had passed the order of assignment during the ban period in his personal capacity and therefore, the assignment itself is suspicious.3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 20215. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would oppose by stating that civil suit in O.S.No.332 of 2017 has been instituted for permanent injunction and pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, at Chengalpattu. 6.The order of the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram, dated 09.06.2018 shows that there are suspicious circumstances in respect of the patta held by the appellant. Therefore, a thorough investigation and enquiry needs to be undertaken. Under those circumstances, the claim of the respondents 1 to 4 was also negatived. In para 11 of the order, the District Revenue Officer has stated that the present patta held by Tvl.Standard Fire Works Company Limited, though they claim that they are enjoying the land based on proper title deeds and patta, the matter needs thorough investigation and enquiry, since the land is classified as Anadeenam in the year 1961 settlement Register. The transactions pertaining to the land from 1961 to till date i.e for 57 years, and the revenue records mutations occurred during the above period are also to be thoroghly enquired before arriving at a decision on the allegations levelled by the respondents 1 to 4. The District Revenue Officer has not 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021adjudicated those allegations in view of the fact that he has negatived the claim of the respondents 1 to 4 and the appellant herein filed a civil suit for permanent injunction. However, the District Revenue Officer has directed the Tahsildar, Tiruporur, to submit a detailed report after finalisation of the civil suit. 7.This Court is of the considered view that civil suit is only for permanent injunction. The document produced by the appellant and the respondents 1 to 4 are found to be suspicious. As per the settlement register, the subject land has been classified as “Anadeenam” and several other revenue records needs to be verified. The property situates at Pudupakkam, Thiruporur Taluk, Sub-Urban to Chennai City. The land value in that locality is sky-rocketing. Therefore, it is just and necessary to conduct an ellobrate enquiry into the allegations raised by the respondents 1 to 4 and findout whether the subject land is a patta land or Government land. 8.The High Court cannot conduct a roving enquiry, since the allegations require verification of revenue records and production of 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021documents by the respective parties. Disputed facts are to be adjudicated by the competent authority. In the present case, the District Revenue Officer, though formed an opinion that the documents produced are suspicious in nature, he has arrived at a conclusion that the respondents 1 to 4 are not entitled for any relief. But the allegations against the appellant also considered as serious in nature. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the Commissioner of Land Administration has to conduct a detailed enquiry for arriving at a conclusion and to pass appropriate orders. Since the land is a valuble land and suspicion is, whether the land belongs to the Government or patta land, the pendency of a suit is not a bar for adjudication of the issues with reference to the revenue records by the Commissioner of Land Administration. It is just and necessary to verify the geniunity of the patta granted in favour of the parties. The genesis and the basis are to be verified in the context of the revenue records and other documents available. 9.In view of the facts and circumstances, the 5th respondent The Additional Chief Secretary /Commissioner of Land Administration, 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai, is directed to issue notice to all the parties, who all are necessary parties for effective adjudication of issues, conduct an enquiry by calling for the original records and by affording an opportunity to the parties and decide the issues on merits and in accordance with law. If it is found that the subject property is Government land, swift actions are to be initiated to resume the public property by following the procedures as contemplated under law. The Commissioner of Land Administration is requested to expedite the enquiry and complete the same as expeditiously as possible. With these observations, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.J) (C.S.N.J) 09.09.2025Index : Yes/NoInternet : Yes/NoSpeaking order/Non-Speaking orderNeutral Citation : Yes/Nosms7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021To1.The Additional Chief Secretary/Commissioner of Land Administration, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.2.The Settlement Officer, Office of the Settlement Offier, Survey and settlement Department, Survey House, Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600 005. 3.The District Collector, Office of the District Collector, Kancheepuram District - 631 501.4.The District Revenue Officer, Office of the District Revenue Officer, Kanchepuram District - 631 501.5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Chingleput, Kancheepuram District-603 001.6.The Tahsildar (Additional Headquarters) Tiruporur Taluk, Tiruporur, Kancheepuram District - 603 110.8/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.3090 of 2021S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,andC.SARAVANAN,J.,smsW.A.No.3090 of 2021andCMP.No.21424 of 202109.09.20259/9