This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the fair and decretal order dated 06.10.2005 made in P.No.1117 of 2003 (Salem) on the file of the Revenue Court, Special Deputy Collector, Salem.
2. The first petitioner in civil revision petition since deceased was the cultivating tenant in respect of the suit property owned by the respondents 1 to 8. The first petitioner died. The petitioners 2 and 3 were impleaded as his legal heirs. The respondents 1 and 2 also died and his legal heirs were impleaded as respondents 9 to 18.
3. According to the respondents 1 to 8, they are the landlords of agricultural land in question. The first petitioner was cultivating the land. Subsequently, the first petitioner did not cultivate the land and left the land to become barren. The first petitioner permitted some third parties to put up a thatched shed and first petitioner was residing with his sons, petitioners 2 and 3, away from the petition land. In the circumstances, the respondents 1 to 8 filed a petition in P.No.1117 of 2003 on the file of the Revenue Court, Special Deputy Collector, Salem to direct the first petitioner to hand over possession of the lands to the respondents 1 to 8 by an order of eviction.
4. The first petitioner filed counter affidavit and stated that due to failure of monsoon, he could not cultivate the land.
5. Before the Authority, the first petitioner's son gave evidence that his father is residing with him. The respondents 1 to 8 have marked documents to show that the first petitioner was residing away from the petition property.
6. Considering the materials on record, oral and documentary evidence, Authority allowed the petition and ordered eviction of the first petitioner.
7. Against the said order dated 06.10.2005 made in P.No.1117 of 2003, the present civil revision petition is filed by the petitioner.
8. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondents 9 to 15 and perused the materials available on record.
9. Pending civil revision petition, the first petitioner died and petitioners 2 and 3 were impleaded as the legal heirs of the deceased first petitioner vide order of the Court dated 26.02.2014 made in C.M.P.Nos.1041 to 1046 of 2012 and C.M.P.No.1274 of 2008 in C.R.P(NPD).No.2028 of 2005.
10. From the address given by the petitioners 2 and 3, it is clear that the petitioners 2 and 3 are residing in Salem District and they are not residing in Namakkal District where petition land is situated. Further, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that as per the order passed in the P.No.1117 of 2003, the respondents 1 to 8 have already taken possession on 18.01.2006. The Authority has held that based on the oral and documentary evidence, the first respondent is not residing in the petition land and is not cultivating the land. Considering all the above facts, there is no irregularity or illegality warranting interference with the order of the learned Trial Judge dated 06.10.2005.
10. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No costs.
06.09.2017 Index: Yes/No gsa To The Special Deputy Collector, Revenue Court, Salem.
V.M.VELUMANI,J.
gsa C.R.P.(NPD)No.2028 of 2005 06.09.2017