AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The writ appeals have been directed against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 18.01.2018 made in W.P.Nos.27043 of 2009 & 2857 of 2010.
Heard Mr.K.A.Ravindran, learned counsel for the appellants, Mr.P.S.Sivashanmuga Sundaram, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 and Mr.K.Doraisami, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents 6 and 7.
It appears that the appellants have occupied the lands in question in the year 1960 and were in enjoyment of the said land. The father of respondents 6 and 7 was the owner of the lands in question. The lands were taken over by the Government, after the abolition of Zamindari and introduction of ryotwari in the year 1951 and were classified as Poramboke. The Board of Revenue rejected the request of the father of respondents 6 and 7 for the grant of patta under the Abolition Act 16 of 1948 and directed them to apply for patta outside the scope of the Act. Thereafter, the application for the issue of patta was made and the same was rejected on the ground that respondents 6 and 7 possessed lands more than the limits under the Tamil Nadu Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961.
In the meanwhile, the father of respondents 6 and 7 passed away and therefore, respondents 6 and 7 filed a suit in O.S.No.397 of 1977 before the District Munsif Court, Sankari at Salem for declaration and permanent injunction against the Government authorities and the said suit was decreed on 25.7.1978 holding that the respondents 6 and 7 are the absolute owners of the properties in question and that the suo motu change of classification of poramboke lands without invoking the provisions under the Act is not proper. Consequently, the Government granted patta to respondents 6 and 7 by G.O.Ms.No.338 Rev. (L.A.) Department dated 10.9.2009. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants filed the writ petitions.
The learned single, after hearing both the parties, held that the appellants are trespassers and that they have not made out the case for the grant of relief prayed for by them and accordingly, dismissed the writ petitions. Hence, the above appeals.
Admittedly, the appellants filed a suit before the Civil Court for permanent injunction and the same was dismissed for non prosecution. But, the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Court in the original suit filed by the respondents 6 and 7 had become final, consequent to which, the Government has issued patta to them. Thus, there is no dispute with regard to the title of the respondents 6 and 7 with respect to the lands in question.
In the light of the above and in view of the fact that the lands in question which were taken over by the Government were restored to its original character and patta was granted to the respondents 6 and 7, the claim of the appellants that they were in continuous possession and enjoyment of the lands in question and as such, the said lands have to be assigned to them, has to be rejected.
In the circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the learned single Judge requires no interference by this Court. Accordingly, these writ appeals are dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, CMP Nos.6871 and 6872 of 2018 are also dismissed.