A. R. MALAIRAJAN Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner assails G.O.Ms.No.860 Home (Police XIX) Department dtd. 30/11/2015 insofar as the property described in Sl.No.2 of the schedule thereto is concerned.

(2.) The petitioner states that he was the owner of the property bearing Survey No.77/1B of Sattur Village, Iyan Padandhal Village, measuring about 510 kuzhi; the property in Survey No.179/1 measuring 178 kuzhi; and the property at Survey No.71/2A2 measuring about 2000 kuzhi. He had obtained a loan from the Tamilnad Mercantile Bank, Sattur branch. Since the petitioner's business was not performing well, the petitioner was unable to discharge dues to the bank. Therefore, the petitioner decided to sell the property. In relation thereto, the petitioner entered into an agreement with one S.Raja. Pursuant to such agreement, the petitioner agreed to sell the property for a sale consideration of Rupees Two Crore and Forty Five Lakhs and received an aggregate sum of Rs.51.00 lakhs as advance. According to the petitioner, Raja failed to fulfill his obligations under the agreement for sale. Therefore, the petitioner terminated the agreement for sale. Instead, the petitioner sold the property under sale deed dtd. 19/8/2015 to K.P.Baskaran, B.Maheswari, Paulson Prabu and P.Jeyanthimeena.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the property belonged to the petitioner and not to S.Raja and, therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner assailed the impugned order because his name figures therein.