N M SHANMUGAM Vs. TAHSILDAR NORTH COIMBATORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal is focussed by the original plaintiff, animadverting upon the judgement and decree dated 01.06.2006 passed in A.S.No,29 of 2006 by the 3rd Additional Subordinate Court of Coimbatore, in reversing the judgement and decree of the trial Court, namely, 3rd Additional District Munsif Court at Coimbatore, in O.S.No,796 of 2003. For convenience sake, the parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status before the trial Court.

(2.) THE plaintiff filed the suit O.S.No,796 of 2003 seeking the following reliefs: "(a) To declare that the order of the defendants passed in proceedings in Na.Ka.No.19116/2002-A-6 dated 10.04.2003 is null and void and does not bind the plaintiff as the same is highly arbitrary, excessive and against the provision of law and natural justice b) declare that the act of defendants in imposing of the 'B' Memo for the suit property as null and void as it is highly arbitrary, one sided, without any basis and against law and the natural justice c) decree for mandatory injunction directing the defendants not to evict the plaintiff from the suit property on the basis of the impugned order passed in Na.Ka.No.19116/2002/A-6 dated 10.04.2003, except hearing the plaintiff and after holding an enquiry according to law, except due process of law d) decree for a mandatory injunction directing the defendants to fix the sale price according to the provision of law and considering the provision of the privileges of the Ex-service men by considering the guideline and market value e) direct the defendants to pay to the plaintiff the costs of the suits and f) grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed just, necessary, fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice." on the ground that he as an ex-service man applied for allotment of land in his favour during the year 1986 however, there was no express order, but orally he was permitted to occupy the suit property measuring an extent of 2.75 acres in S.F.Nos.1174/5 and 1174/6 the plaintiff was paying money to the revenue officials and in turn they have given receipts and belatedly he came to understand that those receipts were nothing but 'B' memos the first defendant issued Ex.A1 dated 10.04.2003 vide the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.19116/2002/A-6. Animadverting upon such action of the defendants, the suit was filed.

(3.) ULTIMATELY, the trial Court rejected the prayers of the plaintiff, however, granted a decree to the effect that on payment of Rs.1,40,800/- by the plaintiff in favour of the Government within a period of two months, the defendants should execute the necessary deed as otherwise, the plaintiff could be evicted by the defendants. As against such order of the lower Court, an appeal was filed by the plaintiff and the appellate Court modified the judgment and decree of the trial Court by reducing the sale price from Rs.1,40,800/- to Rs.70,800/- after giving due deduction to Rs.70,000/- which the plaintiff had spent towards reclamation of the suit property. Being disconcerted and aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the First Appellate Court, the Second Appeal is filed on various grounds and by suggesting the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether the respondents can fix an amount, doubling the market rate for a poromboke land which was already allotted to an ex-serviceman. 2. Whether the respondents can fix an amount to the land which was handed over to an ex-service man 18 years before. 3. Whether the learned first Appellate Judge while reversing the order of the 3rd Additional District Munsif Judge and given his finding that the land was allotted to the appellant and the same was developed by him by spending Rs.70,000/- is justified to fix the payment of Rs.70,000/- on the Appellant."