LOUIS CANNAIYA Vs. ADDITIONAL SECRETARY; DISTRICT COLLECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, would aver that he hails from a family which had 400 years history and he and his brother, namely Louis Sinnaiya Arokiyasamy and his sister Rathinamary were jointly owning landed properties to an extent of 1.25 Hectares (2 Kanis 33 Kuzhis and 0.9 Veesams) of dry land comprised in cadastre No.491 Bis and 492 Bis R.S.No.152/2 in Karuvadikuppam Revenue Village, Oulgaret Sub Registration District, Puducherry. According to the petitioner, the said properties originally belong to the petitioner's great grandfather, late Louis Arokiasamy Mudaliar and the petitioner along with his brother and sister inherited the same with absolute rights. The petitioner would further state that on 09.01.1978, he and his brother entered into an agreement of sale with the sixth respondent herein in respect of 1.25 Hectares (2 Kanis 33 Kuzhis 0.9 Veesams) comprised in cadastre (Survey) No.492, R.S.No.152/5, Karuvadikuppam Revenue Village, Oulgaret Municipality and due to personal constraints, they were unable to perform their part of the agreement. Hence the sixth respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.168/1979 on the file of the Additional Sub-Judge Puducherry for specific performance of the Agreement of Sale dated 09.01.1978 and the said Suit was decreed on 19.09.1980. The respondents levied execution and got the sale deed executed through II Additional Sub-Judge Puducherry, in respect of the land admeasuring to an extent of 1.25 Hectares comprised in cadastre No.492, R.S.No.152/5, however, a mistake has crept in while mentioning the extent of lands.

(3.) It is the specific case of the petitioner that the lands in cadastre No.491 Bis and 492 Bis, R.S.No.152/4, are not form part of the above said sale deed except the land in cadastre No.492, R.S.No.152/5 and it is also not the subject matter of O.S.No.168/79, filed by the sixth respondent for specific performance. The petitioner would further state that his sister Rathinamary, being the co-owner, had 1/6th share of the land in R.S.152/5 and since her share was also conveyed to the sixth respondent, she has executed a Release Deed dated 09.07.1983 registered in Doc.No.1919/83 releasing her 1/6th share in the land, which was conveyed through the above said sale deed and according to the petitioner, the said land is in cadastre No.492, R.S.No.152/5 and the sister of the petitioner has also received consideration of Rs.7,900/- from the sixth respondent for executing the said release deed. It is further stated by the petitioner that the sixth respondent somehow manipulated the records with malafide intention by including both R.S.Nos.152/4 and 152/5 in the Schedule of the Release Deed dated 09.07.1983. Subsequently, the petitioner along with his brother and sister sold a major portion of the land of 1.31 hectares comprised in R.S.No.152/4 (cadastre No.491 Bis and 492 Bis) retaining 12000 sq.ft (21 kuzhis) in 492 Bis and the purchaser had developed the same into housing plots and the remaining extent of land was in possession of the legal heirs of late Gundu Govindan, who was a cultivating tenant.