PARIMALA SELVAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petitions has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.23 of 2022, on the file of the First Respondent Avadi - CCB Police.

(2.) FIR in Crime No.23 of 2022 was registered on the basis of the Complaint given by Second Respondent/De facto Complainant against the Petitioners for the offences under Ss. 465, 467, 468, 471, 34 & 120-B, I.P.C. by the Avadi CCB.

(3.) The allegations made in the FIR, in brief, are as follows: The land in Survey No.634, Vilangadupakkam Village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District, originally belonged to Rukmani Ammal. She was granted Patta in P. No.112 in respect of this property. Rukmani Ammal sold this property to Irudhayam through a Registered Sale Deed, dtd. 24/1/1990. From the said Irudhayam, Second Respondent purchased this property on 22/8/1991 through a registered Sale Deed. Patta was changed in her name in P. No.471. From the date of the purchase, she has been in possession and continuous enjoyment without any disturbance. Computer Patta was also issued in 2011. Patta stood in her name till January 2021. She received a communication from the Tahsildar, Ponneri, dtd. 8/12/2016, stating that one Parimala Selvan had given a Petition for cancelling the Patta in her name in respect of the property in Survey No.634. She appeared before the Tahsildar on 9/12/2020. She was asked to come the next day along with the documents relating to the property. On 18/12/2020, she visited with the documents in support of her claim. The Tahsildar did not receive the documents, but asked her to submit it before the e-Seva Centre. Thereafter, she received a communication stating that Patta in Survey No.634 stood in her name was cancelled. The Order of the Tahsildar, Ponneri, is apparently illegal and contrary to the documentary evidence and physical possession. She came to understand that Patta was cancelled on the premise that there was UDR Patta in respect of this property in favour of Perumal. Perumal obtained UDR Patta in respect of this property by indulging in fabrication of documents and Patta was granted to him in P. No.261. Thereafter, in the Enquiry conducted, he admitted that Rukmani Ammal was the Owner of the property in Survey No.634 and therefore, Patta in his name in P. No.261 was cancelled and Patta was granted in respect of this property in favour of Ponnusamy. The property in the name of Ponnusamy, in Survey Nos.631, 632 and 633 had been sold to Perumal's wife Mahadevi, wherein, in the Schedule of the Sale Deed, Survey No.634 is shown as one of the boundaries, for which, MaryMonica is the Owner, that is the Second Respondent. Cancellation of Patta in the name of Second Respondent after more than 30 years of enjoyment without referring to the Title Deeds of Second Respondent is absolutely illegal. Petitioner/Accused Parimala Selvan is an Advocate, who is trying to usurp the property by fabricating the documents. Therefore, the Complaint was given. On that basis, FIR came to be registered.