IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Special Original Jurisdiction

(Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India)
W.P. No.

of 2016

Mr. K.P. Pandurangan,

S/o K.G. Perumal,
No. 42, Kalaignar Street,
Cholambedu,
Thirumullaivoyal,
Chennai 600 062.
Petitioner
-Vs1.

The District Collector,

Collectorate, Thiruvallur,
Thiruvallur District 602001

2.

The Tahsildar,
Poonamallee District,
No 5, Trunk Road,
Poonamallee,
Chennai 600056.

3.

The Revenue Divisional Officer,

Vayalanalloor Village,
Poonamallee Taluk,
Thiruvallur District.
Respondents
AFFIDAVIT OF THE PETITIONER
I, Mr. K.P. Pandurangan, S/o K.G. Perumal, Hindu, aged about 63

years,

residing

at

No.

42,

Kalaignar

Street,

Cholambedu,

Thirumullaivoyal, Chennai600 062, do hereby solemnly affirm and

sincerely state as follows:1. I am the Petitioner herein and as such I am well acquainted with the
facts and circumstances of this case.
2.

I submit that I hav

3.

I submit that my mother was the absolute owner of about 1 Acre

50 Cents of land situated at Old T.S. No. 856, New T.S. No. 9, Ward F,
Block 21, situated at Thirumancholaipudhur, Vaniyambadi Municipal
Division, Devasthanam Village, VaniyambadiTaluk, Vellore District,
which was registered in her name through Doc. No. 2853 of 1986,
registered at the SRO, Vaniyambadi. I further submit that another piece
of land admeasuring about 1 Acre 17 Cents was registered in the name

Page No. 1
No. of corrections: Nil

of her late husband and my father, Late Deivasigamani vide Doc. No.
2826 of 1986, which also came under the possession of my mother
after my fathers death. Hence, in toto, my mother was in possession
and ownership of about 2 Acres 67 Cents of vacant land, situated at
Vellore District, which was home to several trees and plantations.
4.

The Petitioner submits that after the death of her father, while

her mother was in absolute possession of the abovementioned

properties, the title of those properties was shared by all her fathers
legal heirs, i.e., her mother Chandrammal, the Petitioner and her three
sisters and the family of her deceased brother. The Petitioner further
submits that the rights of these legal heirs is evidenced by a joint patta
in all their names as evinced in Patta Pass Book Nos. 419420, 419422,
419423 419425 and 419426 on the file of the Tahsildar, Vaniyambadi.
5.

The Petitioner submits that, matters standing thus, the brother of

Late Deivasigamani, one, Mr. Boopalan along with Mr. ShabbirAhamed,

without even any remote right or title over the said properties, had
tried to encroach upon the properties and engaged in malafide
activities to usurp the said land. The Petitioner submits that, it is for
this purpose that her mother had engaged an advocate in the name of
Mr. Rama Ashokan having address at Door No. 25, 6th Street,
Pudupettai, Thirupattur Town, Thirupattur Taluk, Vellore District for
filing a suit for interim injunction against the obstructers. The case was
filed as I.A. No. 358/10 in O.S. No. 103/10 before the Principal District
Magistrate Court, Vaniyambadi which was ordered in favour of the
Petitioners mother. The Petitioner submits that the abovesaidadvocate
had provided a fee structure which was complied with by the
Petitioners mother and he had also sought for the original documents
from the Petitioners mother, purportedly for the case.
6.

The Petitioner submits that while her mother had engaged the

said advocate Mr. Rama Ashokan to safeguard her property, he had

turned into a classic example of the fence eating the fenced; he had
sensed the incapacity and gullibility of the Petitioners mother and had
woven an elaborate scheme to embezzle the land. He had advised the
Petitioners mother that the case she wanted to file against the
obstructers would demand her to go from pillar to post and that the
best way she could handle that case was by giving a power of attorney

Page No. 2
No. of corrections: Nil

in his name of the advocate. It is submitted that the Petitioner's

mother was illiterate and had trusted the advocate and the nobility of
his profession and gave a Power of Attorney to Mr. Rama Ashokan
without studying the statements made in the Power of Attorney itself.
7.

The Petitioner submits that the Power of Attorney had then been

registered as Doc. No. 830 of 2009 dated 23.02.2009; she had also
provided the original documents and had also signed in some blank
documents for filing of the original suit, trusting the words of the
advocate Mr. Rama Ashokan who had assured her that he will redress
her grievance and fight for justice.
8.

The Petitioner submits that Mr. Rama Ashokan had abused the

Power of Attorney in his name and had shown as if he had sold the
properties to his own wife, Selvi vide Doc. No. 1819 of 2010 and then
reconveyed it to himself by way of a settlement deed on 04.11.2011
vide Doc No. 8362 of 2011 and Doc. No. 8363 of 2011. The Petitioner
submits that her mother was rudely shocked when she became aware
that she was defrauded cunningly by her advocate and immediately
rushed to the gates of law and justice to redress the injustice meted
out to her. The Petitioner's mother had preferred a complaint to the
Police Commissioner on 25.04.2013 and had also filed an O.S. No.
120/13 before the DMC, Vaniyambadi against the fraudsters.
9.

The

Petitioner

submits

that

even

after

her

mother

had

complained twice to the Commissioner of Police, Vellore District,no

proper action was taken, after which she had filed a Crl. OP. No.
1609/2014 before the High Court of Judicature at Madras to expedite
the criminal complaint preferred by her. It is during the course of this
case, when Mr. Rama Ashokan had filed an intervening petition and
submitted a few documents, that the Petitioners mother had come to
know that he had even begotten the Patta in his name for the
properties belonging to the Petitioner and her family. The Petitioner
submits that Mr. Rama Ashokan had suppressed all the abovesaid
matters and had fabricated all false documents to beget this Patta in
his name.
10.

The Petitioner further submits that this is not a one-off case of

land grabbing by the said Mr. Rama Ashokan, but that he has been

Page No. 3
No. of corrections: Nil

already accused and proved of committing the same crime of

fabricating the documents and usurping the properties of unsuspecting
individuals and it has also been widely circulated in regional
newspapers, albeit after the Petitioners mother was defrauded too.
The Petitioner further submits that Mr. Rama Ashokan has also
defrauded another unsuspecting widow, much like the Petitioners
mother, by name of Lakshmi who had also preferred a police complaint
against the fraudster and his wife and had registered the complaint as
CSR No. 301/2013 in the file of Thirupathur Town Police Station. This
goes on to prove that both Mr. Rama Ashokan and his wife are habitual
offenders and are quite the experts in fabricating false documents and
grabbing the lands of vulnerable women.
11.

The Petitioner submits that presently, emboldened by his

fabricated documents and falsely acquired Patta dated 15.02.2012, Mr.

Rama Ashokan is intensely trying to sell off the Petitioners family lands
as soon as possible, fearing that the cases filed against him will be
ordered in favour of the Petitioners family and so as to cut losses and
to make a quick buck.
12.

The Petitioner submits that a mere glance at the Patta Passbook

Records of the said lands would have revealed that there was no single
person Patta for the said lands but only Joint Patta to the whole family
of nine members and that the Respondents have erred in transferring
the Patta to Mr. Rama Ashokan based on a single Power of Attorney
given by a single member of that family and not the whole family.
13.

The

Petitioner

humbly

submits

that

when

the

supported

documents in the Crl. OP. referred suprawere filed, there also was a
document titled Proceedings of the Tahsildar dated14.02.2012 wherein
it was ordered that a joint patta be issued in the name of Mr. Rama
Ashokan and his wife Selvi. The Petitioner submits that it is this
impugned proceedings that the Petitioner seeks to quash in the
present Writ,
14.

The Petitioner respectfully submits that this person Mr. Rama

Ashokan, who is a habitual defrauder and land grabber must have

played at different levels with varied forged documents to have altered
the land records in his name. The Petitioner submits it was only when

Page No. 4
No. of corrections: Nil

he filed an intervening petition and supported documents in the Crl.

OP. referred supra did the Petitioner come to know that the Town
Survey Register had been altered to remove the Petitioners name and
include the names of Mr. Rama Ashokan and his wife, Selvi. Highly
confused by this turn of events, the Petitioner set about to enquire into
this and finally, on 15.04.2015 she got a copy of the Town Survey
Register from the Municipality Office of Vaniyambadi. The Petitioner
submits that herein, the name of Mr. Rama Ashokan was removed and
that only the name of his wife Selvi was reflected. Thus it could clearly
be seen that there are great forces of fraud and illegal alteration of
records at play.
15.

The Petitioner submits that this is an error on face of the record

and was confident that once the concerned authorities are made aware
of this blatant error, it would be rectified and the wrongly edited Town
Survey Register would be rectified and the impugned proceedings
would be quashed. Patta would be revoked. Fuelled by this confidence,
the Petitioner had sent a representation dated 09.07.2014 to the
Respondents, detailing all the relevant facts and circumstances.
However,

even

after

receipt

of

the

said

representation,

the

Respondents have not taken any action to remedy the wrong and the
Petitioner and her whole family is left in a lurch.
16.

The Petitioner submits that since there was no reply nor

recognition to her earnest appeal and since her rights in the impugned
properties is imperiled because of this blatant error of the Respondents
which is visible on the face of the record and owing to the fact that the
Respondentsare turning a deaf ear to the Petitioners claims, without
any other alternative remedy, the Petitioner is approaching this
Honble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and hence
this Writ petition.
For the aforesaid reasons it is therefore prayed that this Honble
court may be pleased to dispense With original copy of Proceedings of
the Tahsildar dated 14.02.2012 passed by 3 rd Respondent and pass
such other or other orders as this Honble court may deem fit and
proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.
For the aforesaid reasons it is therefore prayed that this Honble

Page No. 5
No. of corrections: Nil

court may be pleased to issue a writ in the form of Certiorarified

mandamus calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the
Tahsildar dated 14.02.2012 and quash the same and consequently
direct

the

09.07.2014

Respondents
and

to

consider

consequently

alter

the
the

representation
Town

Survey

dated

Register

accordingly and to pass such other or further orders as this Honble

court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and
thus render justice.

Before Me
Solemnly affirmed on this
the
day of June 2016
and the deponent herein
has affixed her signature in
my presence.
Advocate:Chennai

Page No. 6
No. of corrections: Nil

MEMORANDUM OF WRIT
PETITION
(Under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Special Original Jurisdiction
W.P. No.

of 2016

Mrs. Kanchana,
D/o Late Mr. S.
DeivasigamaniMudaliar,
Petitioner
-Vs1.

The District Collector,

O/o. The Collectorate of
Vellore District,

and 3 others
Respondents

DISPENSE WITH PETITION

M/s. NATHAN AND ASSOCIATES

COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER

Page No. 7
No. of corrections: Nil