Back
2014 Supreme(Mad) 268
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. MANIKUMAR, J.
M/s. Sree Sumangala Metal and Industries (P) Ltd., rep. By its Director & Others
Versus
The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu & Others
W.P.No. 3295 of 2014 & M.P.Nos. 1 to 3 of 2014
Decided on: 06-02-2014
For the Petitioners:Sanjay Ramasamy for M/s. Krishna Ravindran, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1, R3 & R4, Sudarsana Sundar, Advocate, R2, T.N. Rajagopalan, Spl. Govt. Pleader.
A party who suppresses a material fact in a writ petition is not entitled to equitable relief.
Headnote:
SUPPRESSION OF MATERIAL FACT - EQUITABLE RELIEF - WRIT PETITION - WITHDRAWAL OF WRIT PETITION - WAIVER OF RELIEF - ABUSE OF PROCESS OF LAW - PUBLIC POLICY
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the proceedings, dated 02.09.2013, issued by the Special Tahsildar (L.A.), Irungattukottai Expansion Scheme, Unit-V, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District, 3rd respondent herein and consequently, to direct the respondents herein to consider the representation, dated 20.06.2013 of the petitioners to exempt the land, measuring an extent of 28.22 acres out of 70.60 Acres in Survey Nos.55/2D, 2E, 61/2B and 61/2D2 at Irumpedu Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the petitioners had suppressed a material fact by not disclosing the deletion of Survey Nos.55/2D and 55/2E from the challenge made in W.P.No.9487 of 2008, in their representation to the Government or in the supporting affidavit to the writ petition. The Court held that this suppression of a material fact amounted to an abuse of process of law and that the petitioners were not entitled to equitable relief.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners had suppressed a material fact by not disclosing the deletion of Survey Nos.55/2D and 55/2E from the challenge made in W.P.No.9487 of 2008? 2. Whether the suppression of this material fact amounted to an abuse of process of law? 3. Whether the petitioners were entitled to equitable relief?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioners had suppressed a material fact by not disclosing the deletion of Survey Nos.55/2D and 55/2E from the challenge made in W.P.No.9487 of 2008, in their representation to the Government or in the supporting affidavit to the writ petition. 2. The Court held that this suppression of a material fact amounted to an abuse of process of law, as it prevented the Court from having a full and fair understanding of the facts of the case. 3. The Court held that the petitioners were not entitled to equitable relief, as they had not come to Court with clean hands.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petition without going into the merits of the case.
1. M/s. Sree Sumangala Metal and Industries (P) Ltd., represented by its Director, Karthik Sabanayagam, (2)Karthik Sabanayagam, (3)Nityashree Sabanayagam, represented by its Power Agent, Mrs. Kalpana Sabanayagam, (4)Divyalakshmi Sabanayagam, have challenged the proceedings, dated 02.09.2013, bearing No.Na.Ka.1/2012, issued by the Special Tahsildar (L.A.), Irungattukottai Expansion Scheme, Unit-V, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District, 3rd respondent herein and consequently, to direct the respondents herein to consider the representation, dated 20.06.2013 of the petitioners to exempt the land, measuring an extent of 28.22 acres out of 70.60 Acres in Survey Nos.55/2D, 2E, 61/2B and 61/2D2 at Irumpedu Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.
2. The impugned proceedings in Rc.No.Na.Ka.1/2012, issued by the Special Tahsildar (L.A.), Irungattukottai Expansion Scheme, Unit-V, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram District, 3rd respondent herein, dated 02.09.2013, is extracted hereunder:
(“Tamil”)
3. Material on record discloses that notices under Sections 7(5) and 7(7) of the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purpose Act, 1997, has been issued to (1) Nithya Sabanayagam, D/o. Karthik Sabanayagam, (2) Divya Sabanayagam, D/o. Karthik Sabanayagam, (3) Divyalakshmi Sabanayagam, (4) Karthik Sabanayagam, and (5) Nithyashree Sabanayagam. The notice issued to Nithya Sabanayagam, is extracted hereunder:
Rc.No.1/2012/08 O/o. The Special Tahsildar (LA)
Unit No.5
Unit No.5 BK-II IRK Expansion Scheme Sriperumbudur.
NOTICES UNDER SECTION 7(5) AND 7(7) OF THE TAMIL NADU ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR INDUSTRIAL PURPOSE ACT, 1997 (ACT 10/1999)
Notice is hereby given that State Government propose to acquire the lands mentioned in the Schedule below, which are required for a public purpose that is for the setting up SIPCOT Industrial Complex, IRK Expansion Scheme under Act 10/1999. You are required to appear in person or by the authorised agent on 16.10.2013 before the Special Tahsildar (LA), Unit-5, at Sriperumbudur on 11 A.M., and to state/put in a statement in writing signed by you or your authorised agent showing the nature of your interest in the lands, the amount payable for such interest with particulars thereof and to put in a statement containing so far as may be practicable, the name of every person possessing any interest in the land or any part of it as co-owner, mortgagee, tenant or otherwise and the nature of such interest and the rents and profits (if any) received or receivable on account of it for three years next preceding the date of the statement.
PARTICULARS OF THE LAND
District: Kancheepuram Taluk : Sriperumbudur
Village: 134/133/101 Irumbedu
Survey Number Wet/Dry/ Manai Extent Name of the Owner/Registered holder/or other person interested in the land
55/2D Govt. Dry 3.67.5 Nithya Sabanayagam, D/o.Karthik Sabanayagam
Sd/-
Special Tahsildar (LA),
Unit-5,
SIPCOT, IRK Expansion Scheme,
Sriperumbudur.
To
Tmt. Nithya Sabanayagam
4. On 04.02.2014, when the matter came up for admission, Mr. Sanjay Ramasamy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in similar circumstances, by considering the representation, dated 13.02.2013, of one Tvl.Sumangala Industrial Parks and Investments Private Ltd., the Government of Tamil Nadu, Industries (SIPCOT-LA) Department, Chennai, have passed orders in Lr.No.2542/SIPCOT-LA/2013-2, dated 29.04.2013 and that the same has been challenged by the Director of the abovesaid company. This Court, while considering the prayer in M.P.No.2 of 2013, vide order, dated 11.10.2013, has granted status-quo. He further submitted that the present writ petitioners are also similarly placed, and therefore, the said order can be made, is applicable to the facts of this case also.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that when the present petitioners, M/s. Sree Sumangala Metal and Industries (P) Ltd., represented by its Director, Mr. Karthik Sabanayagam, and others, sent a representation, dated 27.02.2013,
