Madras High Court
N.Vanjimuthu vs The Competent Authority Cum on 18 April, 2018
Bench: K.Ravichandrabaabu, T.Krishnavalli
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.04.2018
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.KRISHNAVALLI
W.A(MD).No.608 of 2012
and
M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2012
in
W.P.(MD)No.11116 of 2012
N.Vanjimuthu .. Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Competent Authority cum
District Revenue Officer,
Collectorate, Dindigul.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer,
Dindigul.
3.M/s.Soundararaja Mills Ltd.,
Rep. By its Registered power of attorney
Agent R.Vimal Kannan
(R3 impleaded as per order dated 10.12.2013
in M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2012)
... Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set aside
the order of the learned single Judge of this Court, dated 13.08.2012 in
W.P.(MD)No.11116 of 2012.
!For Appellant : Mr.P.Murugesan
^For R1 & R2 : Mr.VR.Shamuganathan
Speciall Government Pleader
For R3 : Mr.C.Jaganathan
for
M/s.Veera Associates
:JUDGEMENT
[Judgement of the Court was delivered by K.RAVICHANDRABAABU, J] This writ appeal is directed against the order passed in the main writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.11116 of 2012, dated 13.08.2012.
2.The writ petitioner sought for Mandamus forbearing the respondents not to interfere with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject- matter premises pending adjudication proceedings in O.A.No.19 of 2012 and O.A.No.4 of 2011 on the file of the Special Judge under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act.
3.The learned Judge dismissed the writ petition by observing that the respondent has rightly filed an application before the Sub Court and also filed affidavit of undertaking to take over the property and that the petitioner has to satisfy the Court as to the genuine nature of the purchase. Therefore, the learned Judge refused to grant any relief even by way of stop- gap arrangement, pending disposal of the above said two Original Applications. Challenging the said order of the learned single Judge, the present writ appeal is filed.
4.After notice, the matter was taken up on 11.04.2018 for final disposal. On that day, it was represented by the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent that the writ appeal has become infructuous, in view of the fact that the above said two Original Applications viz., O.A.No.19 of 2011 and O.A.No.4 of 2012, were already disposed. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant thus sought time to verity the said fact. Accordingly, this Court adjourned the matter for further hearing today. However, when the matter is taken up today for further hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is not in a position to inform us with regard to the status of O.A.No.19 of 2011 and O.A.No.4 of 2012. He submitted that he is not in a position to contact his parties inspite of his earnest effort. We do not want to keep the matter pending any further, as it is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent that those two Original Applications were already disposed. Since the very writ petition itself was filed seeking for interim protection pending, disposal of those two Original Applications and in view of the fact that those two Original Applications are said to be disposed of already, nothing remains in this writ appeal to be considered further on merits.
5.Accordingly, the writ appeal is disposed of. However, if the appellant/petitioner is aggrieved against the order made in the above said two Original Applications, it is open to him to agitate the same before the appropriate forum in accordance with law. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. No costs.
To
1.The Competent Authority cum District Revenue Officer, Collectorate, Dindigul.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul.
.