S.Ramakrishnan v. The Royal Lands And Nest
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.06.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Review Application No.60 of 2020 in W.P.No.13195 of 2018 and WMP Nos.16091 & 16094 of 2020 S.Ramakrishnan .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Royal Lands & Nest Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Represented by its Director AP 873, Door No.II, 2nd Street, H Block 12th Main Road, West Anna Nagar Chennai 600 040.
2.The Government Represented by the Secretary to the Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.
3.The Inspector General of Registration Mylapore, Santhome Chennai 600 004.
4.The Sub Registrar Kinathkadavu Coimbatore.
5.S.Palanisamy 1/6
6.P.Sadasivam 7.P.Nujundasamy 8.P.Kamalakannan 9.S.Thangaraj 10.S.Suresh Kumar 11.G.Dhanalakshmi .. Respondents Prayer: Review Application filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to review the order dated 20.07.2020 passed in W.P.No.13195 of 2018, pending disposal of the present review application. For Petitioner :
Mr.N.Nithianandam For Respondents :
Mr.S.Jayakumar for R1
O R D E R
The Review Application has been filed to review the order passed in W.P.No.13195 of 2018, dated 17.7.2020.
2.The 11th respondent has filed the present review application on the ground that he is not a party to the settlement that was arrived at between the writ petitioner and the other private respondents. According to the 11st respondent, the other private respondents have colluded with the writ 2/6
petitioners and based on the settlement reached by them, the writ petition was disposed of. Therefore, the 11st respondent in the writ petition wants the order passed in the writ petition to be reviewed. 3.Heard Mr.Nithianandam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Jayakumar, learned counsel for R1.
4.In the considered view of this Court, the 1st respondent had reached a settlement with respondents 4 to 11 in the writ petition and based on that settlement, the writ petition itself was disposed of. Obviously, the 11th respondent in the writ petition does not form part of this settlement. Therefore, if the 11st respondent has an independent claim, it is always left open to the 11st respondent to workout his remedy in the manner known to law and the claim of the 11st respondent cannot be dealt with in a writ petition.
5.The order passed in the writ petition on 20.7.2020 is not passed on any settlement preached by the 11th respondent with the writ petitioner. This settlement was only between the writ petitioner and respondents 4 to 10. Therefore, this settlement will not bind the 11st respondent and the 11st respondent has to independently work out his remedy and it is made clear that the order passed in the writ petition will not come in the way of the 11th 3/6
respondent to workout his remedy and it will not put against him. 6.Accordingly, this Review Application is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
06.06.2024 kp Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No : Yes / No 4/6
To 1.The Royal Lands & Nest Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., Represented by its Director AP 873, Door No.II, 2nd Street, H Block 12th Main Road, West Anna Nagar Chennai 600 040.
2.The Government Represented by the Secretary to the Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.
3.The Inspector General of Registration Mylapore, Santhome Chennai 600 004.
4.The Sub Registrar Kinathkadavu Coimbatore.
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
kp 5/6
Review Application No.60 of 2020 in W.P.No.13195 of 2018 06.06.2024 6/6