IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:19.01.2007
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
WRIT APPEAL Nos.767, 1129 OF 2006
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.20491 of 2004
and
connected miscellaneous petitions
Palaniammal .. Appellant in both the
Writ Appeals and
petitioner in the Writ
Petition.
.vs.
1. The Collector
Coimbatore District.
2. The Revenue Divisional Officer
Tiruppur, Coimbatore District.
3. The Tahsildar
Palladam Taluk
Coimbatore District.
4. The Village Administrative Officer
Mopperipalayam Village
Palladam Taluk
Coimbatore District.
5. The Sub-Registrar
Sub-Registrar Office
Annoor, Avanashi Taluk
Coimbatore District.
6. The Superintendent of Police
Coimbatore District.
7. Sivasamy
8. Rackiappan
9. Subbanna Gounder
10. Gurusamy
11. Sarasammal ..Respondents both the
Writ Appeals and in the Writ Petition.
Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters of
Patent against the orders of the learned Judge Mr.P.D.
Dinakaran dated 25.07.2005 made in W.P.M.P.Nos.24667 and 24668
of 2005 in W.P.No.20491 of 2004 respectively.
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus as stated therein.
For appellant/ : Mrs. Palaniammal
petitioner Party-in-Person
For respondents : Mr. K. Elango
1 to 6 Spl.Govt. Pleader
R.7, R.8, R.9 and R.11 appeared
in person.
No appearance for R.10.
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgement of the Court was delivered by P. SATHASIVAM,J.)
The above writ appeals are directed against the orders of
the learned single Judge dated 25.07.2005 made in
W.P.M.P.Nos.24667 and 24668 of 2005 in W.P.No.20491 of 2004
respectively, in and by which the learned Judge, after finding
that the grievance of the petitioner and the relief sought for
cannot be gone into by this Court, exercising jurisdiction
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, dismissed
those petitions.
2. Considering the fact that the appellant/writ
petitioner is appearing in person, we heard her at length. We
also heard learned Special Government Pleader for respondents
1 to 6.
3. Pursuant to our direction dated 05.01.2007,
respondents 7, 8, 9 and 11 appeared before this Court. We
also enquired and heard their grievance.
4. Inasmuch as the parties are not willing to engage
counsel, we ourselves verified the relief prayed for in the
main writ petition. The prayer in the writ petition reads as
under.
” to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction, in
the nature of a writ to direct the 5th
respondent to cancel all the documents of
the petitioner’s property situated in M.
Pappampatti, Moperipalayam Village,
Palladam T.K. (1) S.No.713/15 (As per
patta Survey No.715/A, extent of 81 cents
landed property’s documents forged by late
by Velusamy and his son Sivasamy in the
year 1994 onwards (2) Survey No.394/3,
395/2B, 395/3B, 395/5A extent of 2.13
acres landed property’s documents forged
by Gurusamy son of Narayana Gounder in the
year 1996 onwards (3) Survey No.702/2
extent of 87 + cents landed property’s
documents forged by Rockiappa Gounder son
of (Late) Marappa Gounder in the year 2001
onwards (4) A tiled house property door
No.8 (Old No.) Pillayar Koil Street,
Pappampatti, Moperipalayam Village,
Palladam Taluk it’s will document forged
by Subbanna Gounder son of Ganapathy
Gounder in the year 2001 onwards,
consequently to register the above said
properties in favour of the petitioner’s
name.
5. During the course of hearing the learned single Judge
(F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla,J.) by order dated 15.03.2005, passed
the following order.
” The Registry is directed to gather a
report from the Principal District Judge,
Coimbatore as to the stages at which the
proceedings referred to in this petition,
pending on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Avinashi as on this date in
order to enable this Court to pass
appropriate orders. The report shall be
collected from the Principal District
Judge, Coimbatore in four weeks time.
Post the writ petition on 12.04.2005.
”
When the matter again came up for hearing on 25.07.2005, the
learned single Judge (P.D. Dinakaran,J.) directed the learned
Principal District Judge, Coimbatore, to give effect to and
pass appropriate orders as ordered on 15.03.2005 and closed
WPMP.No.24667 of 2004.
6. Pursuant to the said direction, the learned Principal
District Judge, Coimbatore forwarded the reports dated
14.11.2005 and 16.11.2005 received from the District Munsif-
cum-Judicial Magistrate, Avanashi in respect of First
Information Report in Crime Nos.344/2000, 243/1999, 254.2001,
308/2003 and 206/2003, which were pending on the file of
District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Avanashi. The
following details are available in the said reports.
The following details are available in the said reports.
Sl. Case No. Station and Crime Stage of the Case
No. No.and Section of
Law.
(1) (2) (3) (4)
1 CC.99/05 Karumathampatty On 29.11.2005, the case
Police Station stood posted and it was
Cr.No.344/2000 reported that A1 is died.
U/s.468, 427, 434 A2 to A5 refused to
IPC. receive the summons and
hence NBW was issued
against them and later it
was recalled. Thereafter
the complainant
continuously absent from
19.1.2006. Notices were
issued to the complainant.
The case was posted on
12.12.2006. On 12.12.2006
also the complainant was
absent. A2 present and A3
to A5 were absent.
Petition U/s.317 Cr.P.C.
Was filed and allowed for
A3 and A4. NBW was issued
to A5. Now the case is
posted to 11.1.2007 for
production of death
certificate of A1 and for
execution of the NBW
against A.5.
2 CC.322 of Karumathampatty On 22.11.2005, after
2002 Police Station clubbing the complaint
Cr.No.243/99 given by defacto
U/s.326, 323 IPC. complainant, other two
accused namely Nanjammal
and Thulasimani added as
A3 and A4 and summons were
issued. As the summons
were refused by A3 and A4.
NBW were issued against A3
and A4. On 19.1.2006,
after getting anticipatory
bail, A4 surrendered. On
7.2.06, the death
certificate for A3 was
filed and charge against
A3 abated. On 29.5.2006,
copies were given to the
accused. On 30.5.06, the
accused denied the charge
and the case was posted to
1.6.06. The defacto
complainant was examined
as PW1 in part. PW1
refused to complete the
Chief examination. Later
PW2 to PW5 were examined.
Now the case is posted to
11.1.07 on the production
of witnesses 2,5 and 6.
3 CMP.3243 Karumathampatty Even after several
of 2002 Police Station adjournments for enquiry
Cr.No.254/01. u/s.202 Cr.P.C., the
complainant has not
produced any witnesses.
Hence, as a last chance,
the case is adjourned to
11.1.2007.
4 STC.2177o Karumathampatty The trial commenced on
f 2003 Police Station 23.2.2006. Pws.1 to 7
Cr.No.206/2003 have been examined and the
U/s.341, 323, 506 prosecution side is closed
(ii) IPC. on 5.12.2006. The accused
was questioned U/s.
313(1)(b) Cr.P.C. Now the
case stands posted to
2.1.2007 for examination
of defence side witnesses.
5 CC.24 of Karumathampatty The District Munsif-cum-
2004 Police Station Judicial Magistrate,
Cr.No.308/2003. Avinashi in her earlier
report has submitted that
the case in Cr.No.308/2003
has been filed u/s.379 IPC
for theft of a Moped. The
complainant of that case
is Sheik Ameen S/o.Kotabai
and not related to the
petitioner Palaniammal.
The case taken on file as
C.C.24/2004 has been
disposed off on 24.2.2004.
7. Today, we once again heard the appellant/writ
petitioner in detail. We also heard respondents 7, 8, 9 and
11, who were present before us. In spite of our request and
persuasion for engaging counsel, appellant/writ petitioner,
who appeared in person is not willing to accept our request.
She repeatedly represented that her complaint regarding
forgery may be enquired and appropriate action may be taken
against the person concerned. From the reports of the
District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Avanashi, it is clear
that the complaints made by the appellant/writ petitioner are
pending before the concerned Court. In such circumstances,
the grievance expressed by the petitioner cannot be gone into
by this Court. We are satisfied that ends of justice would be
met by directing the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial
Magistrate, Avanashi to give priority to the above mentioned
pending cases, viz., CC.99/2005, CC.322/2000, CMP.3243/2002
and STC.2177/2003, and dispose of the same one way or the
other, after affording opportunity to all the parties
concerned. The appellant/writ petitioner, is directed to
cooperate for the early disposal of the above cases. After
disposal of the above said matters, learned District Munsif-
cum-Judicial Magistrate, Avanashi is directed to submit a
report to this Court on or before 30.04.2007.
8. In view of the reasons stated above, the relief as
claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition cannot be
granted by this Court, however, our direction mentioned above
would satisfy the petitioner. It is made clear that in the
above mentioned proceedings, if the complaint regarding
forgery is proved, it is open to the writ petitioner to take
appropriate action against the persons concerned. With the
above observation, the writ appeals and the writ petition are
closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are also closed.
Post all these matters on 04.06.2007, for reporting
compliance.
kh
To
1.The Collector
Coimbatore District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer
Tiruppur, Coimbatore District.
3.The Tahsildar
Palladam Taluk
Coimbatore District.
4.The Village Administrative Officer
Mopperipalayam Village
Palladam Taluk
Coimbatore District.
5,The Sub-Registrar
Sub-Registrar Office
Annoor, Avanashi Taluk
Coimbatore District.
6.The Superintendent of Police
Coimbatore District.