N. DEVADOSS Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR SIVAGANGAI DISTRICT, SIVAGANGAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the third respondent in Pa.Mu.A1/8955/2023 and to consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 herein to mutate the patta, in line with the judgment and decree of the Sub Court, Devakkottai, in A.S.No.58 of 1968 dtd. 24/12/1969, which subsequently came to be confirmed by this Court in S.A.No.725 of 1970 dtd. 8/9/1972.

(2.) I have heard Mr.S.Manikandan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.S.Kameswaran, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.C.Sundaravadivel, learned counsel for the fifth respondent.

(3.) The case of the petitioner is that the property comprised in S.No.55/1, measuring 1.91 Acre in Amaravathipudur Village, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District, besides other properties belonged to his father, Late.Nachiappan Ambalam, vide registered sale deeds dtd. 13/11/1951 and 28/10/1953, registered as document Nos.2878/1951 and 276/1953 respectively and from the date of purchase, he was in possession and enjoyment of the property. While so, the said property in S.No.55/1 was mutated wrongly including the name of one Chinna Rakkappan Ambalam as a joint owner. Challenging the joint patta, the petitioner's father filed a suit in O.S.No.372 of 1966 before the District Munsif, Devakkottai, against one Ramasamy Ambalam, S/o.Chinna Rakkappan, as the said Chinna Rakkappan passed away at that relevant point of time. The trial Court dismissed the suit. However, on appeal in A.S.No.58 of 1968, the Sub Court, Devakkottai, allowed the appeal filed by the petitioner's father, as against which, the said Ramasamy Ambalam filed a second appeal in S.A.No.725 of 1970 and this Court confirmed the judgment of the first Appellate Court and dismissed the second appeal. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner's title has been confirmed and the petitioner's father was having the right to the entire extent of 1.91 Acre in S.No.55/1 and the judgment having become final, no rights could have been claimed by the defendant / Ramasamy Ambalam.