The petitioner failed to exhaust alternate remedies regarding the cancellation of patta, and prior decrees confirming respondents' title and possession were determinative.

ORDER :

The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:

“To direct the 1st respondent to forthwith cancell Patta Nos. nos. 4475 and 440 purportedly issued by the Tahsildhar, Maduravoyal Taluk, Chennai District to (1) V.K.Ramamurthy and his siblings, and to (2) P.T. Balasamy, in respect of the property comprised in Survey Nos 13/1A1, 13/1A2, 13/1B, 13/2 and 13/3 measuring 10 acers situated in Maduravoyal village, Chennai Distirct .”

2. The petitioner has approached this Court for a mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to cancel patta Nos.4475 & 440, issued by the 2^nd respondent to 4^th and 5^th respondents, in respect of the property comprised in Survey Nos 13/1A1, 13/1A2, 13/1B, 13/2 and 13/3 measuring 10 acers situated in Maduravoyal village, Chennai Distirct.

Petitioner's case:

3. The petitioner would contend that one Sivakozhudammal and others had filed a suit in O.S.No.203 of 1996, on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee, for declaration and permanent injunction against Jayalakshmi Ammal and the 4^th respondent in respect of an extent of 20.5 acres in S.No.13/1A1, 13/1A2, 113/1B, 13/2 and 13/3, Maduravoyal village, Chennai. The petitioner is the 8^th plaintiff in the said suit.

4. The suit was tried along with the three other connected suits and by Judgement and Decree dated 22.01.2010, O.S.No.203 of 1996, was decreed and other suits were dismissed. Instead of the challenging the said Judgement by way of a First Appeal, the 4^th respondent chose to file W.P.Nos.1520 to 1525 of 2010 and these Writ Petitions were tagged along with the W.A.Nos.379 & 380 of 2010, before the Division Bench. The Division Bench of this Court by order dated 01.04.2010, disposed of the Writ Petitions directing the 4^th respondent to file a regular First Appeal, before the Jurisdictional Court.

5. Thereafter, A.S.No.3 of 2001, was instituted by the 4^th respondent, on the file of the District Court, Tiruvallur. The petitioner herein had immediately taken out an application in I.A.No.80 of 2011 to dismiss the appeal as the appeal had been filed with a delay and petition for condonation of delay had not been filed. The appeal had been numbered without condoning the delay. Therefore, by order dated 28.03.2012, the application in I.A.No.80 of 2011, was allowed. Challenging the same, the 4^th respondent filed C.R.P.No.2406 of 2012.

6. By order dated 31.07.2012, the above civil revision petition was dismissed and the 4^th respondent was directed to file a Second Appeal challenging the Judgement and Decree in A.S.No.3 of 2011. Accordingly, S.A.No.981 of 2012 came to be filed.

7. During the pendency of the above proceedings, suppressing the decree in O.S.No.203 of 1996, the 4^th respondent and his sibling have received the entire compensation amount from the National Highways Authority of India, to the tune of Rs.1,12,09,938/-. This was also brought to the notice of this Court in S.A.No.981 of 2012. Ultimately, by Judgement and Decree dated 23.04.2013, the Second Appeal was disposed of by remanding the matter back to the District Court, Tiruva