Abdul Kuthoos v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI and C.M.P(MD)No.8537 of 2023 1.Abdulkuthoos K.M.Shahul Hameed(Died) 2.K.M.Mohamed Abdulla 3.K.M.Abdul Raheem 4.M.Abdul Kareem 5.Hanisha Begum 6.Nazeera Banu 7.Birthouse 8.Umma Salmma 9.Bilalal Mohammed 10.Mohammed Hasin 11.Vahitha 12.Shahitha 13.Badhurunisa 14.Thamimunisa 15.Kirunisa 16.Mohammed Abdul Rawoof 17.Mohammed Abdul Rasheed 18.Noorunisa 19.Arifa Banu 20.K.M.A.Abdul Basith 21.K.M.A.Mohammed Abdul Kader 22.Rizwana Begum 23.Ayeesa Ammal 24.Jeenathul Jagira 25.S.Abdul Malik 1/6
26.S.Mohamed Thajuthen 27.A.Moideen Abdul Kader 28.Syed Mohamed Sahfeeq 29.Afra Manahil Fathim ... Revision Petitioners/Petitioners/ Plaintiffs Vs.
1.The District Collector, Pudukottai.
2.The District Revenue Officer, Pudukkottai.
3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Illupur, Pudukkottai.
4.The Tahsildar Kulathur Pudukkottai.
...Respondents/Respondents
/Defendants Civil Revision Petition is filed under Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the fair and decreetal order dated 16.06.2023 in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Keeranur.
For Petitioners :Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For Respondents :Mr.G.Surya Ganth, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The Civil Revision Petition is preferred as against the fair and decreetal order, dated 16.06.2023 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in O.S.No.111 of 2016 on the file of the learned District Munsif, Keeranur. 2/6
2.The petitioners as plaintiffs filed the suit in O.S.No.111 of 2016 for declaration and consequential relief of injunction, before the District Munsif Court, Keeranur. When the suit was posted for arguments, the petitioners filed an application in I.A.No.2 of 2023, to reopen the petitioners' side evidence for marking of certain documents pertaining to the events taken place subsequent to the filing of the suit. The same was resisted by the respondents/defendants stating that the suit was filed in the year 2016 and thereafter, the petitioners filed many interlocutory applications and not pressed the said applications would show the attitude of the petitioners that they have no case and their attempt is only to drag on the proceedings. The said I.A was filed belatedly at the stage, when the suit was posted for arguments.
3.However, considering the averments made in the petition and in the counter affidavit and the arguments advanced by the respective counsel, the Court below dismissed the above application. Aggrieved by which, the present civil revision petition is preferred by the petitioners/plaintiffs. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioners would submit that the defendants are not seriously disputing the title of the plaintiffs and in fact, the Tahsildar, Kulathur by his proceedings dated 3/6
21.11.2022 in Na.Ka.A3/8836/2022, directed the Taluk Surveyor to measure the property in order to assign patta to the inhabitants of the area. In pursuant to the order of the Tahsildar, Kulathur, the Revenue Officials conducted an enquiry. The revision petitioners came to know about the fact that the adjacent land owners in the same S.No.194, the classification is mentioned as "Natham". Therefore, the revision petitioners can establish their case by producing the sale certificate, dated 08.01.1921 issued by the Tahsildar in favour of one Abdul Kani and Company. 5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the records available on record.
6.The petitioner has filed a report submitted by the concerned Tahsildar, Kulathur, with regard to the survey conducted in S.No.194. It is seen that the intention of the petitioners herein is only to put forth the events that had taken place subsequent to the filing of the suit, which would support their case. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the respondents in allowing the application to reopen the petitioners' side evidence and to mark the relevant documents. Even otherwise, the respondents are at liberty to cross-examine the witnesses with regard to the 4/6
oral and documentary evidence let-in by the petitioners in this regard. Therefore, the order dated 16.06.2023 passed by the learned District Munsif, Keeranur, in I.A.No.2 of 2023 is set aside and the civil revision petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
19.07.2023 NCC:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No To 1.The Subordinate Court, Ambasamudram.
2.The District Collector, Pudukottai.
3.The District Revenue Officer, Pudukkottai.
4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Illupur, Pudukkottai.
5.The Tahsildar Kulathur Pudukkottai.
6.The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
5/6
K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.
Ns and C.M.P(MD)No.8537 of 2023 19.07.2023 6/6