The Madras High Court Bench here has thwarted yet another attempt made by a group of shopkeepers who were repeatedly criticised by the court for making incessant attempts since 1974 to usurp lands belonging to Palani Dhandayuthapaniswamy Temple in Dindigul district.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao and S.S. Sundar has now dismissed a batch of petitions filed by the shopkeepers to review a judgement passed against them by another Division Bench of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and N. Kirubakaran on April 15 after observing that “it is not possible for us to take a different view.”
Writing the judgement, Mr. Justice Sundar said: “Had there been an eviction of encroachment as it was proposed in 1975 by the temple authorities… there would not have been a claim now in respect of a small piece of land... Now, the petitioners are trying to obstruct the eviction proceedings initiated against them by claiming ownership over a small piece of land.”
In its order, the Bench led by Mr. Justice Ramasubramanian had directed the Executive Officer of the temple to evict the petitioners, S. Jothiramalingam, Karuppasamy, Shanmuga Boopathi, K. Meenakshi and M. Paneerselvam, from the land occupied by them in West Ratha Veedhi near the temple after holding that they were encroachers who had no right over the properties.
The Division Bench had also held that the shopkeepers were guilty of suppression of facts since they had filed the writ petitions, seeking an order restraining the Executive Officer from in any way evicting them from the lands in question, without disclosing the civil suits that had been filed with respect to the properties and other proceedings initiated against them since 1975.
“Had there been an eviction of encroachment… there would not have been a claim now”
The Madras High Court Bench here has thwarted yet another attempt made by a group of shopkeepers who were repeatedly criticised by the court for making incessant attempts since 1974 to usurp lands belonging to Palani Dhandayuthapaniswamy Temple in Dindigul district.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Nooty Ramamohana Rao and S.S. Sundar has now dismissed a batch of petitions filed by the shopkeepers to review a judgement passed against them by another Division Bench of Justices V. Ramasubramanian and N. Kirubakaran on April 15 after observing that “it is not possible for us to take a different view.”
Writing the judgement, Mr. Justice Sundar said: “Had there been an eviction of encroachment as it was proposed in 1975 by the temple authorities… there would not have been a claim now in respect of a small piece of land... Now, the petitioners are trying to obstruct the eviction proceedings initiated against them by claiming ownership over a small piece of land.”
In its order, the Bench led by Mr. Justice Ramasubramanian had directed the Executive Officer of the temple to evict the petitioners, S. Jothiramalingam, Karuppasamy, Shanmuga Boopathi, K. Meenakshi and M. Paneerselvam, from the land occupied by them in West Ratha Veedhi near the temple after holding that they were encroachers who had no right over the properties.
The Division Bench had also held that the shopkeepers were guilty of suppression of facts since they had filed the writ petitions, seeking an order restraining the Executive Officer from in any way evicting them from the lands in question, without disclosing the civil suits that had been filed with respect to the properties and other proceedings initiated against them since 1975.
“Had there been an eviction of encroachment… there would not have been a claim now”
