M.S. KRISHNAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of Sub Court, Salem in A.S No. 37 of 1986 in confirming the judgment of the learned District Munsif, Salem in P.S No. 1255 of 1982. The plaintiffs in the suit are the appellants in the above appeal.

(2.) The suit was filed for declaration that the order of the defendants for eviction in Na.Ka No. 16840/82 dated 25.8.1982, issued by the 3rd defendant was illegal, void and without jurisdiction and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiffs. There was a temple in the Survey No and the plaintiffs were in possession and enjoyment of the suit property for the past 30 years. The land was classified as Koil Poramboke (Temple Poramboke). The plaintiffs have constructed permanent buildings and the assessment stands in the name of the plaintiffs. Each plaintiff is the owner of one house and they are also paying house tax for the buildings. They are paying kist and other taxes to the Government. The plaintiffs were asked to vacate the land in the year 1970, as per the order of the Estate Manager, Salem and they had preferred an appeal to the second defendant. The second defendant had passed order not to vacate the plaintiffs from the property and directed to convert the land from poramboke to patta lands and to grant patta as per Order dated 14.4.1971 Even after the Order, the Revenue Authorities were collecting encroachment charges and patta has not been granted, even though order was passed to the said effect and had become final. After the order dated 14.4.1971, the land had ceased to be a poramboke and procedures alone have to be completed. After the said order, the Government has ceased to be the owner of the property and hence, the plaintiffs are entitled to be in possession of the property. The management of the temple have attempted to dispossess the plaintiffs by unlawfully claiming that they are the owners of the lands. The plaintiffs have presented a petition to the District Collector and other authorities and their representation was under enquiry. The management of the temple have instigated the second defendant to vacate the plaintiffs from the property. The second defendant has passed orders to vacate the plaintiffs. Notice was issued under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act demanding the plaintiffs to vacate the land by the petitioners. The plaintiffs have preferred an appeal to the second defendant and the second defendant had refused to grant stay stating that the respondents have to issue patta and comply with the order dated 14.4.1971 Therefore, the order of eviction passed by the 3rd defendant dated 25.8.82 was without jurisdiction, illegal and void.

(3.) In the written statement filed by the first defendant, it was contended that the claim that the plaintiffs were in possession of the property for thirty years was false. It is true that the land is classified as 'Temple Poramboke '. It is also incorrect to state that they have been permitted to construct permanent buildings in the suit property and that the assessment stands in their name. The plaintiffs have encroached the suit property only 20 years ago and there is no question of the plaintiffs having perfected title by adverse possession. The contention that the Revenue Divisional Officer's order was final was not correct. The plaintiffs have no right to remain in possession of the property as against the real owner, as long as no patta has been granted in their favour and their possession continues to be unlawful. The defendants are entitled to evict the encroachment by following due process of law. The order of eviction has been passed lawfully as against the plaintiffs, who are in lawful possession of the property. Therefore, they are not entitled to any relief of permanent injunction. An appeal provision is provided under the Tamil Nadu Encroachment Act. Hence, the suit filed without exhausting the alternative remedy was liable to be dismissed.