Tmt.Rukkammal @ Rukmani Ammal v. The District Revenue Officer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.09.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN W.P.No.11391 of 2004 and W.P.M.P.No.13416 of 2004 1.Tmt.Rukkammal @ Rukmani Ammal 2.T.R.Gunasekaran 3.T.R.Bakthavatchalam 4.T.N.Chellappa Mudaliar 5.C.Elumalai ... Petitioners Vs.
1. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur.
2. Revenue Divisional Officer, Ponneri.
3. O.Mannappa Naidu
4. T.Ramachandran
5. Sahodara Naidu
6. Raghurama Naidu
7. Ramugan
8. Murugan
9. Rajarathinam 10.Manniah 11.Subbalu 12.B.Mannaiah 13.Annapoorna 14.Janakiraman 15.Balaji 16.Sulochanammal 17.Eswaraiah 18.Janardhana Naidu 19.O.Panduranga Naidu 20.P.Pushpammal (Respondents 19 and 20 impleaded as per order of Court, dated 24.01.2008 in W.P.M.P.No.1391 of 2007 in W.P.No.11391 of 2004) ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in his proceedings in Mu.Mu.No.27432/2003/B3, dated 08.03.2004 and quash the order passed therein and direct the first respondent to take the appeal of the petitioner dated 30.06.2003 on file and dispose of the same in accordance with law. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Kannathasan for Mr.R.Ravi For Respondents : Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali, Government Advocate for RR-1 & 2 Mr.R.S.Varadharajan for RR-4 to 13 and 15 to 18 No appearance for RR-3 and 14 Mr.N.Jayabalan for RR-19 and 20
ORDER
When the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing, learned counsel on either side brought to the attention of this Court by producing a Memo (certified copy), dated 26.10.2005 filed by the learned counsel for the plaintiffs in O.S.No.256 of 1996 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ponneri, which was filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or transferring the suit properties in favour of the third parties; when the suit was pending and as the proceedings were also pending before Revenue authorities, it is stated in the said Memo that the defendants have alienated the suit properties through the registered sale deeds No.
791/2004 and 792/2004 in favour of the third parties; therefore, as the prayer in the said suit itself have become infructuous, the plaintiffs have not pressed the said suit as stated in the said Memo filed by the plaintiffs. Based on the said Memo, it is stated by the learned counsel on either side before this Court that the Court below has disposed of the suit itself by recording the said Memo. It is further stated by the learned counsel on either side that as the properties in question had been sold to third parties, if the petitioners have got any further grievance, it is open for them to agitate the same in accordance with law. Therefore, no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ Petition, which is accordingly closed. No costs. W.P.M.P. is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
cs To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ponneri.
+1cc to Mr.P.Arumugarajan, Advocate, S.R.No.65170 W.P.No.11391 of 2004 VG II(CO) CA(04/10/2017)