Fraud vitiates every solemn proceeding, and no right can be claimed by the fraudsters on the ground of technicality.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Learned Judge in Review Application No.166 of 2021.)

D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

This appeal is filed by the Writ Petitioners aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, allowing the Review Application and consequently, passing the order of setting aside the earlier order dated 21.09.2021 passed in W.P.No.15507 of 2021 and declaring the Judgment and Decree made in A.S.No.122 of 2011, dated 03.01.2013, as a nullity and non-est in the eye of law and also further directing to initiate proceedings against the four persons, who had utilized the forged and fabricated the order, dated 15.04.1976 and dealt with the properties in S.Nos.6/8, 60/4, 88/5 and 89/1.

2. The appellants herein had originally come to this Court by way of W.P.No.15507 of 2021. It was the contention of the appellants that they are the absolute owners in respect of the property measuring an extent of Ac.1.05 cents, having been purchased by them by a registered Sale Deed dated 06.01.1990. Earlier, when ''''Uzhavar Sandhai'''' was sought to be established by the State Authorities over the said land, they had filed a suit in O.S.No.528 of 2000 seeking for declaration that they are the owners of the said property and consequently seeking for permanent injunction. Even though the said suit was dismissed, on an appeal preferred by them in A.S.No.122 of 2011 by Judgment and Decree dated 03.01.2013, the appeal suit was allowed and decree was granted that they are the owners of the property and also permanent injunction restraining the State Authorities from interfering with the above said land. In the teeth of the said decree, the respondents were taking steps to establish ''''Micro Compositing Centre'''' in the same lands and therefore, in the said Writ Petition they prayed that the respondent should consider their representation dated 23.02.2018 and 17.07.2020 and remove the shed, equipment and solid waste lying in the said property owned by them.

3. Considering the fact that the Competent Civil Court had decreed the suit, the learned Single Judge, by order dated 21.09.2021 allowed the Writ Petition by directing that the respondent cannot to go forward and construct the Micro Compositing Centre in the property and they have to necessarily consider the representations and steps must be taken to remove the structures already put up by them.

4. Thereafter, the District Collector, Chennai, filed the present Review Application No.166 of 2021, subsequently placing certain materials on record and praying to review the above order passed. Learned Single Judge after considering the facts placed in the review application, firstly, found that the suit which was decreed by the Appellate Court is primarily based on Ex.A-3, being the copy of ''A'' register. The said ''A'' register shows that in respect of S.No. 138/2 at Column No.11, the name of one Rathinavelu was written in hand, who is the predecessor in title of the writ petitioners. However, in respect of the type of the land use in Column 12, it is mentioned as ''''Anadheenam''''. Therefore, the Learned Single Judge found that on the face of it Ex.A-3, stood self redundant, as the name of the individual is entered in Column No.11, and ''''Anadheenam'''' in Column No.12 cannot go together.

5. Therefore, on a perusal of Ex.A-3, by itself speaks that unauthorized and incorrect interpolation was made. That apart, the Learned Single Judge took into consideration, the original ''A'' register which was produced in the review and which did not contain the said name, Rathinavelu. The pictures of both the original and fabricated ''A'' register themselves are a part of the Judgment of the Learned Single Judge. In view of the above, the Learned Single Judge, firstly found that Ex.A-3, which was the basis of the grant of a decree, is a forged and false document.

6. This apart, Ex.A-4, which is claimed to be a