CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE v. LAKSHMINARAYANANWMP No

WMP No. 48501 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 11-12-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANANWMP No. 48501 of 2025 in W.P.No.31183 of 20251. ArulS/o.Veerappan, No.214, Keezhchetti Street, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore.2.Sivakumar S/o.VeerappanNo.626 North Street, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore.3.Parthiban S/o.VenugopalNo.327, Thillai Street, Chinnappanayakkanpalayam, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore.4.Sivaguru S/o.SeetharamanNo.237 Keezhchetti Street, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore.Petitioner(s)Vs1. A/m Kailasanathar ThirukkoilNaduveerapatti, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District, By Managing Trustee, Vaithilinga Mudaliar S/o. Murugesan, 531, East Street, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District.2.The CollectorCuddalore District, Cuddalore.3.The TahsildarCuddalore, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalor. District https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 20254.The Block Development Officer,Cuddalore Panchayat Union, Cuddalore,5.The Executive OfficerNaduveerapatti Panchayat, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District.Respondent(s)PRAYER Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed Article 226 of the Constitution of India to implead petitioners 1-4 as Respondents 5-8 in the writ petition.For Petitioner(s):R. Sunil KumarFor Respondent(s):Mr.D.Baskar , D.Jayasree For R1Mr.M.Shajahan Spl.Gp For Rr2 And 3.Mr.G.Velu Agp For Rr4 And 5.ORDERHeard Mr.R.Sunil Kumar for the petitioner, Mr.D.Baskar for the first re-spondent, Mr.M.Shajahan for the second and third respondents and Mr.G.Velu for the fourth and fifth respondents.2. The litigation is between Senguntha Mudaliars and Padayachis of Naduveerapatti Village has been going on for over a century. A suit for title had been presented by the members of the Senguntha mudaliar community in O.S.No.291 of 1939. The same had been decreed on 31.07.1943. Thereafter, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 2025the Government of Tamilnadu had took over the lands in the exercise of powers vested with it under the Tamilnadu Estates [Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari] Act, 1948. The Kailasanathar temple represented by members of Senguntha Mudaliars community approached the Settlement Officer seeking ryotwari patta under 1948 Act. The Settlement Officer denied their request holding that the land was never treated as a ‘ryoti’ land and that at all points of time, it had remained as a water body. The proceedings attained finality on the appeal filed by the Senguntha Mudaliars before the Board of Revenue. 3. Yet again, the third round of litigation was commenced. A suit in O.S.447 of 1974 was presented by the Senguntha Mudaliars pleading that they alone are entitled to manage the property belonging to Kailasanathar Temple. In the said suit, the Padayachis were represented by one Kaliamurthi Padayachi. The HR&CE Department was arrayed as second defendant in the said suit. In this suit, the specific survey no.176/1, which is the subject matter of this Writ petition, had been shown in the schedule. After contest, O.S.447 1974 came to be decreed on 06.08.1974. 4. At least at this stage, the litigations ought to have come to an end. Un-fortunately, it was not to be. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 20255. One more suit came to be presented in O.S.867 of 1980, on the file of the District Munsif Court at Cuddalore. The relief sought for in the said suit was for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the members of the Padayachi community of Naduveerapatti Village from entering upon the suit property and interfering with the plaintiff’s possession and enjoyment of the same as set forth in detail in schedule IV to the plaint. The suit was decreed. An appeal was preferred before the learned District Judge at Cuddalore, who took up the appeal in A.S.No.2 of 2006, confirmed the decree and judgment of the trial Court. The Padayachis preferred a second appeal in S.A.238 of 2011. After hearing both sides, this Court partly modified the decree holding that the defendants /appellants and others members of the Naduverrapatti Village are re-strained by an order of injunction from interfering with the peaceful possession enjoyment of the Sengunthar Mudaliar community, who are managing the Naduveerapatti Arulmighu Kailasanathar Temple. A portion of the decree was modified permitting the general public to bath in the tank in Plot no.4 before fire walking [jP kpjp] utsavam and stay there till the utsavam commences. This Court further held that apart from the Senguntha mudaliar community, no other person has any right to cut the branches of the Ficus religiosa [Arasa maram]. It is not in dispute that this judgment had attained finality. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 20256. The cause of action for the present writ petition is on account of an at-tempt made by the Government to deepen the water body situated in survey No.176/ 1. Noticing that their right is sought to be threatened, the members of the Senguntha Mudaliar community approached this Court for Mandamus. Coming to know of this litigation, the members of the Padayachi community of Naduveerapatti Village have moved an application to implead themselves in the proceedings.7. The Padayachis claim that their right would be affected if any Order is passed in the Writ Petition. Hence, they sought to be impleaded as party re-spondents.8. Mr.Sunil, relying upon the proceedings under the Estate Abolition Act as confirmed by the Board of Revenue and thereof the District Collector dated 17.05.2011 urges that the tank belongs to one and all and on account of the fail-ure of the Senguntha Mudaliar Community to maintain and deepen the kuttai, the rights of Padayachis and other general public are being affected. Hence, he pleads to implead himself in the writ petition.9. Per contra, Mr.Baskar urges that the right of the members of Sengun-tha Mudaliar community has been settled as early as on 31.07.1943 when the suit in O.S.No.291 of 1939 came to be decreed. He pleads that whatever dis- https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 2025putes between the padayachis and Senguntha Mudaliars of Naduveerapatti, it has been given a quietus by the judgment of this Court in Second Appeal S.A.No.238 of 2011. Hence, he seeks dismissal of the impleading petition.10. I have carefully considered submissions of both sides and perused the records. 11. The issue presented in the writ petition is whether the State of Tamil-nadu can interfere with the rights of the petitioners who belong to Senguntha Mudaliyar community, who are managing the Kailasanathar Thirukoil of Naduveerapatti. In this temple, there exists a pond in Survey No.176/1. The Civil Court has settled the right of the temple as early as on 31.07.1943. I should point out that the suit in O.S.No.231 of 1939 is not an injunction suit simplicitor. It is a suit for declaration with respect to the right of the Senguntha Mudaliar Community to manage the Kailasanathar temple and for permanent in-junction restraining the padayachis of the said village from entering into the properties. The padayachis were not represented in person. The suit had been filed under Order I Rule 8 of Code of Civil Procedure denoting the 18 defend-ants therein as representatives of the padayachi community of Naduveerapatti village. The decree passed in a representative capacity suit would be binding not only on the parties to the suit but also on those who claim through or under them. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 202512. The petitioners herein claim that they belong to Padayachi com-munity of Naduveerapatti. Hence, the decree granted on 21.07.1943 is binding on them. As pointed out earlier, the decree and judgment of this Court in S.A.No.238 of 2011, dated 21.8.2011, accepted the decree of the trial Court and modified it only to the extent that not only to the members of the Padayachi community of Naduveerapatti have right but also members of the other com-munity have a right to have a bath in the pond, but must leave the area immedi-ately when the utsavam commences. This decree stares on the face of the im-pleading petitioner. 13. The reliance placed upon by Mr.Sunil on the proceedings under the Inam Abolition Act as confirmed by the Board of Revenue does not assist him. This is for the simple reason, the judgment of Mr.Justice Rajasuriya referred to both these documents, while deciding S.A.238 of 2011. In so far as the Order passed by the District Collector on 17.05.2011, the said Order has been passed after the judgment and decree of this Court in the second appeal. An Order passed by the Executive Authority cannot over ride the decree of declaration granted by the Civil Court as early as in 1943 as well as the injunction granted by this Court on 21.08.2011. Once the right of the Senguntha Mudaliars had been declared by the civil Court, the revenue authorities are duty bound to obey the same. This is on account of Article 261 [1] of Constitution of India as well https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 2025as per the standing orders of the Board of revenue. The right of the writ petitioners, having been declared in a civil court, as against the predecessors of the present parties, I do not find any necessity to implead Padayachi of Naduveerapatti in this litigation. 14. The last submission made by Mr.Sunil, does deserve some consideration. If the pond situated in survey no.176/1 in Naduveerapatti Village is not maintained in a proper manner, it will defeat the right of the Padayachi community to have a bath and participate in the jP kpjp utsavam. To that lim-ited extent alone, the impleading petitioners might have a grievance. 15. In the light of the above discussions, the Writ Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. Mr.Baskar states that the Senguntha Mudaliars of Nadaverapatti, who are managing the Kailasanathar Temple, would take steps to maintain and deepen the kuttai in Survey No.176/1. He shall state the time period within which the pond would be cleaned, deepened and maintained, so as to enable not only the Padayachis of Naduveerapatti but also the general public to have a bath and to participate in the utsavam to be conducted in Arulmighu Kailasanathar Temple, would be reported tomorrow. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 202516. To state the time period, post on 12.12.2025. 11-12-2025Index:Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderInternet:YesNeutral Citation:Yes/NovrcTo1.A/m Kailasanathar ThirukkoilNaduveerapatti, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District, By Managing Trustee, Vaithilinga Mudaliar S/o. Murugesan, 531, East Street, Naduveerapatti, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District.2.The CollectorCuddalore District, Cuddalore.3.The TahsildarCuddalore, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalor. District4.The Block Development Officer,Cuddalore Panchayat Union, Cuddalore,5.The Executive OfficerNaduveerapatti Panchayat, Cuddalore Taluk, Cuddalore District. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP No. 48501 of 2025V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.WMP No. 48501 of 2025 in W.P.No.31183 of 2025 11-12-2025