Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Adams Associates vs 7 The Authorised Officer

Madras High Court|31 January, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Petitioner has come up with the present writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents no. 1 to 3 to conduct the subdivision of the land measuring an extent of 2.61 Acres of land comprised in SF.No. 263/3 at Kalaran Thottam Rajiv Gandhi Nagar Road Vadugapalayamputhur Vadugapalayam Post Vadugapalayam Village Palladam Taluk Thiruppur District-641 664 with necessary police protection in the presence of the respondents No. 6 and 7..
2. According to the petitioner, he is the successful bidder through public auction sale conducted pursuant to the proceedings initiated under SARFAESI Act and he had been recognised as the purchaser and patt had also been granted in his favour. Subsequently, petitioner made application to the third respondent for sub division of the lands, the same had been obstructed by the eighth respondent who is claiming to be the original borrowers for the reasons best known to him. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present petition.
3. Learned Special Government Pleader had produced the counter affidavits of the third and fifth respondent. As per the counter affidavit of the third respondent, the eighth respondent is causing hindrance for such measurement and if sufficient police protection is given they would take further action. As per the counter affidavit of the fifth respondent, Inspector of Police, Palladam Police Station, they are ready and willing to give police protection to the revenue officials as well as to the petitioner for such measurement and that the same can be taken in accordance with law.
4. In view of the above stated position, the fifth respondent is hereby directed to give sufficient police protection to the revenue authorities as well as to the petitioner and the third respondent shall measure the land and submit a report in accordance with law.
This writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
31.01.2017 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No smi B.RAJENDRAN, J.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Adams Associates vs 7 The Authorised Officer

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
31 January, 2017