IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-08-2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE K. GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI W.A No. 2520 of 2025 Pushpa Sundaram W/o.Sundaram, No.5A, New West Street, Avvai Nagar, Choolaimedu, Chennai-94.

..Appellant Vs

1. The Commissioner Corporation of Chennai, Rippon Building, Chennai.

2. The Commissioner, Ambattur Municipality, Ambattur, Chennai.

3. The Asst. Engineer, Zone-7, Mogappair East, Corporation of Chennai, Chennai-37.

4. The Tahsildhar, Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, Chennai.

..Respondents Prayer : Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order passed by this Honble Court dated 08-12-2021 made in WP.No.6436 of 2015.

For Appellant : Mr.G.Karthikeyan, Senior Counsel for Ms.A.Jagadeeswari For Respondents : Ms.P.T.Ramadevi, Standing Counsel -for RR 1 to 3 Mr.Vadivelu Deenadhayalan, Addiitional Government Pleader - for R4

Judgment

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.Suresh Kumar J.)

This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated

08.12.2021 made in W.P.No.6436 of 2015.

2. The issue relates to a land to the extent of 1200 Sq.ft in S.No.156A and another part of the land measuring 1200 Sq.ft in S.No.130A totalling 2400 Sq.ft at S.No.396/19 at Mugappair Village, Saidapet Taluk. It is the claim of the appellant / writ petitioner that the land has been purchased by her, which has been duly registered by the concerned registering authority. When that being so, according to the appellant / writ petitioner, all of a sudden the respondent ie., the 4th respondent Tahsildar for the requiring Department ie., Corporation of Chennai for the public purpose of laying a road, had interfered with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the appellant / petitioner and thereby, despite the resistance having been shown by the writ petitioner / appellant, the land has been taken by the respondents for the purpose of laying the road and the road has been laid.

3. Only at that juncture, the appellant / writ petitioner, had approached the writ Court seeking for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to give re- possession of the petitioner's land. The said writ petition was heard and disposed by the learned Writ Court by order dated 08.12.2021.

4. Assailing the said order, Mr.G.Karthikeyan learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant would contend that it is not a Government or Circar Poramboke land as claimed by the respondents, but it is a Patta land and all documents are in favour of the vendor of the appellant including Adangal, which clearly establishes that the land in question belongs to the vendor of the appellant from whom it has been purchased for valid consideration and the sale also has been effected by way of a registration of the sale deed. Therefore, it is the conclusive proof to establish the title over the property. When that being so, if at all the respondents wants to take the property belongs to the appellant for the public purpose of laying a road, the Government being an eminent domain, has got every right to acquire the land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. They could have invoked the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, instead, they straight away taken the land under the guise of stating that the land belongs to the Government as Government Poramboke land.

5. When that being the issue, it should have been resolved no doubt by the Civil Court, but no time has been given to the writ petitioner / appellant to even approach the Civil Court. Assuming that the respondents claim right over the property as if it is a Government Poramboke land, when the appellant is having valid documents to establish her title, those issues can be resolved only by the Civil Court. Without resorting to the said course of action since the land has been taken by the respondents and suddenly it has been utilized for the public purpose, it reflects the high handedness on the part of the respondents, he contend