2024 Supreme(Mad) 1717
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.SUNDAR, K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, JJ.
D.Amirthalakshmi W/o.Dhananjeyan – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector Collectorate Office – Respondent
W.P. No.16070 of 2024
Decided on : 21-06-2024
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellant : Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan
For the Respondents: Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader
IMPORTANT POINT
Private land disputes involving allegations of fraud must be resolved through civil suits, not writ petitions.
Headnote:
Fraud - Land Ownership - Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971; Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Plots and Layouts Rules, 2017; Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use Rules, 2017 - The court emphasized the necessity of civil suits for private land disputes and the inapplicability of writ petitions for such grievances.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner claimed that her mentally ill husband was defrauded of land by a private respondent who created a fraudulent sale deed and began unauthorized construction on the land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the primary complaint involved a private land dispute that should be resolved through a civil suit, not a writ petition, as the allegations of fraud and unauthorized construction were intertwined with ownership rights.
Issues: Whether the writ petition was an appropriate remedy for the alleged fraudulent sale and unauthorized construction on private land.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that private land disputes, particularly those involving allegations of fraud, must be addressed through civil litigation rather than through writ petitions.
Result: The writ petition is dismissed.
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by M.Sundar, J.)
The case of the writ petitioner is that her husband one Dhananjeyan (who is mentally ill/mental development is limited) owns 'lands admeasuring 1 acre or thereabouts comprised in S.Nos.15/11 and 15/5A2A2, Sottavanam Village, Virudhachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District' {hereinafter 'said land' for the sake of brevity and clarity}.
2. Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner, who was before us in the Admission Board i.e., Motion List submitted that fourth respondent, who is a private respondent has created a fraudulent Sale Deed dated 15.02.2022 (registered as document No.658 of 2022 on the file of District Registrar, Virudhachalam) as if the writ petitioner's husband Dhananjeyan has sold 6 cents of land from and out of said land (from and out of aforementioned 1 acre of land) and on this basis, fourth respondent is illegally putting up construction thereat i.e., in the 6 cents of land' {'land in question' for the sake of convenience and clarity} in violation of 'the Tamil Nadu Town and Country Planning Act, 1971' {hereinafter 'TNTCP Act' for the sake of brevity}, 'the Tamil Nadu Regularization of Unapproved Plots and Layouts Rules, 2017' {hereinafter 'TNRUPL Rules' for the sake of brevity} and 'the Tamil Nadu Change of Land Use (From Agriculture to Non-agriculture purposes in Non-planning Areas) Rules, 2017' {hereinafter 'TNCLU Rules' for the sake of brevity}.
3. Learned counsel pointed out that the writ petitioner has sent a 'representation dated 06.02.2024' {hereinafter 'said representation' for the sake of brevity} to R1 - District Collector, Cuddalore as regards the aforementioned complaint.
4. Prayer in the captioned 'Writ Petition' {hereinafter 'WP' for the sake of brevity} is to mandamus (direct) the respondents 1 to 3 i.e., District Collector, Cuddalore Revenue Divisional Officer, Cuddalore and Jurisdictional Tahsildar i.e., Tahsildar, Virudhachalam to remove alleged illegal unauthorised construction said to have been put up by R4 in the land in question. To be noted, prayer in captioned WP reads as follows:
'For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue an order, direction, writ more particularly a writ in the nature of WRIT OF MANDAMUS, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to remove the illegal unauthorized construction of the 4th respondent in the agriculture land at sub-division Survey No.15/11 to an extent of 6 cents in Survey No.15/5A2A2 total extent of 78 cents of Nanjai land at Sottavanam Village, Virudhachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District, considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.02.2024 and pass order thereon on merit and in accordance with law, after holding an enquiry and affording an opportunity to the petitioner and other persons interested concerned and pass such other orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper and thus render justice.'
5. Learned counsel emphatically submitted that no civil suit has been filed either by writ petitioner or by writ petitioner's spouse as regards the aforementioned complaint. Be that as it may, learned counsel drew our attention to Rule 15 of TNRUPL Rules which talks about 'Consequences of non-regularisation' and also Rules 6(1)(e) and 6(2)(i) of TNCLU Rules. To be noted, Rule 6 of TNCLU Rules which deals with guidelines to be followed by R1 for giving prior concurrence qua change of land use from agriculture to non-agriculture and it also talks about ascertaining whether the land is fit for continuing cultivation and Rule 6(2)(1) talks about status of land as in revenue records.
6. Primary complaint of writ petitioner is that land in question belongs to her husband but it has been fraudulently taken away by R4 by creating a fraudulent sale deed dated Sale Deed dated 15.02.2022 (registered as document No.658 of 2022 on the file of District Registrar, Virudhachalam) and by encroaching upon the same. It is also