Madras High CourtWA(MD)/1155/2025dismissed

Govindaraj v. Sri Jayajothi And Company Pvt Ltd

2025-04-29Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu,Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 29/04/2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and CMP(MD) No.7256 of 2025 Govindaraj ... Appellant/9th respondent v.

1.Sri Jayajothi and Company Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Senior Manager (Administration) O.E.Division, S.Radhakrishnan No.7/73 Industrial Estate Soolakarai Virudhunagar District ... 1st Respondent/petitioner 2.The District Collector Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.

3.The Judicial Magistrate cum Revenue Divisional Officer, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar 4.The Tahsildar Aruppukottai Taluk Virudhunagar District 5.The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar Aruppukottai VI, Virudhunagar 6.Vijayarajan 1/5

7.Radhakrishnan 8.Sakthivel 9.Sambath Arasu ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent against the order of this Court dated 17.03.2025 in WP(MD). No.31200 of 2023. For Appellants : Mr.D.Sakkaravarthi For Respondents : Mr.S.S.Madhavan for R2 to R5 Additional Government Pleader Mr.AN.Ramanathan for R1

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.SRIMATHY,J.) The 9th respondent in the writ petition is the appellant herein.

2. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the writ Court dated 17.03.2025 passed in WP(MD) No.31200 of 2023.

3. The writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent/writ petitioner challenging the inclusion of the appellant herein in the patta to the property in question. The property in question was purchased by the first respondent/writ petitioner. While so, it is the case of the writ petitioner 2/5

before the writ Court that the appellant herein had sold the plots showing/citing the property of the writ petitioner as common pathway. Subsequently, patta has been issued by including the name of the appellant herein by the official respondents and challenging the same, writ petition was filed.

4. The writ Court, after hearing all the contentions, had allowed the writ petition by remitting back the matter to the 3rd respondent herein and directed the 3rd respondent to pass orders after hearing the parties. Challenging the said order, the 9th respondent is before this Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the official respondents.

6. A perusal of the order of the writ Court would show that the writ Court had remitted back the matter to the 3rd respondent herein to pass orders afresh after hearing the parties to the dispute. Hence, there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the writ Court. However, the parties are restrained from encumber the property until the patta 3/5

proceedings are settled.

7. With this observation, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. [J.N.B.,J] [S.S.Y.,J] 29.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR To 2.The District Collector Virudhunagar District Virudhunagar.

J.NISHA BANU, J AND S.SRIMATHY, J.

ORDER

IN WA(MD) No.1155 of 2025 Date : 29/04/2025 5/5