1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.03.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD).No.816 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 M.Abdul Hakim : Petitioner Vs 1. The District Revenue Officer Madurai District,Madurai 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Madurai District,Madurai 3. The Thasildar Madurai North Taluk Madurai District, Madurai : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the second respondent in his proceedings dated 08.10.2010 in Na.Ka.No. 10487/2010/N cancelling the patta in favour of the petitioner bearing Survey No. 9A1C and extent of 4 Areas, Madurai North Circle, Anaiyoor Village, 2nd Bit and quash the same. For petitioner : Mr. G.Muthukannan For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramanian Additional Government Pleader O R D E R The petitioner aggrieved against the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, has come forward with this Writ Petition on the ground that the petitioner is a bona fide purchaser and no opportunity was given to the petitioner. 2. The learned Additional Government Pleader would only contend that from the impugned order, the vendor of the petitioner has already initiated civil suit and the same is pending . In the impugned order, it is very clearly stated that pursuant to the pendency of the suit, the patta entries have been revised and it was placed in the original level, since the order only states to keep it in abeyance as per the original position till the disposal of the civil suit. He would further contend that there is no impediment or infirmity in the order passed by the authorities concerned. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that he is the bona fide purchaser and he has not been given any notice, the Revenue Divisional Officer has passed the impugned order. From the impugned order, it is very clearly stated that the original owner has been given notice and he has also participated. The petitioner is a subsequent purchaser and he cannot have any independent right. Paragraph 4 of the impugned order reads as follows:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 khz;GkpF nrd;id cau;e Pjpkd;w kJiu fpis tof;F lgps;Agp (vk;b) vz;. 5564/ 2007 kw;Wk ; vk;gp vz;. 1/2007 Mfpatw;wpy; fle;j 23.7.2007 y; gpwg;gpf;fg ;gl;l cj;jutpd;gb kJiu tlf;F tl;lhl;rpau; mYtyfj;jpy; kJiu tlf;F tl;lk ; Mida{h; 1 gpl; fpuhkk; gl;lh vz; 108 ,uj;J nra;ag ;gl ;L mjpy; fl;Lg ;gl ;l nrhj;Jf ;fs ; njhlu;ghf jpU.fhu;Nkfk; kw;Wk ; jpUkjp. Nfhij vd;w n$ak;khs; vd;gtu ;fSf;fpilNa tof;F tprhuiz eilngw;W tUk; epiyapy; khz;GkpF nrd;id cau;e Pjpkd ;w kJiuf;fpis toq;fpAs;s j Pu ;g ;Giuf;F vjpuhf Nkw;gb tprhuizia ghjpf;Fk ; tifapy; jpU.fhh;Nkfk; vd;gtu; Gy vz; 10/9 V 1y; fpiua eltbf;iffs; Nkw;nfhz;L mjd; Ngupy; ghu;it -2 y; fz;l Nfhg;gpy; gl;lh khWjy;fs ; nra;ag ;gl ;Ls ;sJ jtwhdJ vd;gjhy; ghu;it 1 y; fz;l kJiu tlf;F tl;lhrpaupd; gupe;Jiuapid Vw;W ghu;it 2 y; fz;l – Nfhg;gpy; epfo;e ;Js ;s gl;lh khWjy;fis ,uj;J nra;J Kd;gpUe;j epiyf;F nfhz;L nrd;W itf;f kJiu tlf;F tl;lhrpaUf;F cj;jutpLfpNwd;. kJiu tlf;F tl;lhrpah; mYtyfj;jpy; Mu;b Mh; vz; 12638/2007/ b 3 vd;w Nfhg;gpy; eilngw;W tUk; tprhuiz KbtilAk; ehs; tiu Mida{h; 1 gpl; fpuhkk; gl;lh vz; 108 y; fl;Lg ;gl ;Ls ;s Gy vz;fspy; gl;lh khWjy;fs; nra;tij jtpu;f ;Fk ;gbAk; kJiu tlf;F tl;lhrpau; Nfl;Lf ;nfhs;sg;gLfpwhu;. 5. This Court is of the considered view as the civil suit is pending and the patta has been directed to be restored to the original position as it was then existing, there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. The petitioner's right will be decided in the Civil Court and it is always open to him to challenge those orders. 6. With the above said observation, this Writ Petition is dismissed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Revenue Officer Madurai District,Madurai 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Madurai District,Madurai 3. The Thasildar Madurai North Taluk,Madurai District,Madurai +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR.7809 +1CC TO MR.G.MUTHU KANNAN, ADVOCATE SR.7663 Vsg : SR : 06.04.2011 : 2p/6c W.P.(MD).No.816 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 23.03.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/