Nanesh Developers Llp v. The State of Tamilnadu

ORDER The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records pertaining to the notice bearing Ref. No. Na.Ka. 1711/ 2025/ Aa1 issued by the 8th respondent dated 28.05.2025 and subsequent notice dated 20.08.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to execute the subject property situated at Karanodai Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District measuring about 9 Acres and 17 cents covered by survey Nos. 32/1A , 32/2A, 32/2B1, 33/3 , 35/1A, 35/1B, 35/2A, 35/2B, 35/2C, 35/2D, 35/3B, 38/1A, 38/1B, 38/2, 38/3A, 38/6A, 38/6C, 41/3 measuring an extent of 4 Acres and 19 cents S.Nos. 32/1B and 32/2B2 measuring an extent of 0.60 cents and S.Nos. 36/1 36/2 36/3 36/4A 36/4B, 36/5, 37, 42/1 ,42/2, 42/3, 42/4, 42/5, 42/6 and 43 measuring an extent of 4 Acres and 38 cents belonging to the petitioner from the order of confiscation referred to in the impugned notice dated 28.05.2025.

¶2The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a bonafide purchaser of a property measuring approximately 9 Acres and 17 Cents located at Karanodai Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District. Prior to purchasing the land, the petitioner conducted thorough due diligence by inspecting revenue records and encumbrance certificates, which showed no adverse entries, attachments, or legal blocks. Relying on these clean official records, the petitioner bought the property in good faith for valuable consideration, leading to the execution of registered Sale Deeds and the issuance of a Patta in their favour.

¶3However, the property was historically tied to a Mr. H.M. Pandey (associated with M/s. Madras Institute of Medical Sciences), who was convicted under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, alongside the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 1944. While a confiscation and attachment order concerning this conviction (Special C.C. No. 3 of 1999) had been passed by the High Court and confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this order was never recorded in the encumbrance certificates or revenue records. This omission inadvertently allowed the accused to sell the property to unsuspecting third parties. The petitioner only discovered these past criminal proceedings during an enquiry on 30.05.2025 They subsequently received an initial notice dated 28.05.2025 (Ref. No. Na. Ka. 1711/2025/A1), from the 8th respondent, followed by a second notice dated 20.08.2025, from the Tahsildar of Ponneri, summoning them for an enquiry on 04.09.2025. Currently, the 8th respondent is attempting to enforce the historical confiscation order by initiating distraint proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Revenue Recovery Act. In response, the petitioner argues that these actions directly threaten their property rights under Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Having purchased the land legally without any knowledge of title defects, and having no other effective alternative remedy, the Petitioner has filed this petition to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶4The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that this Court, by order dated 18.09.2025, had directed the petitioner to appear before the Authority concerned and produce all the documents. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared in the enquiry conducted by the Tahsildar, Ponneri Taluk. The Tahsildar has also filed a report that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr.H.M.Pandey, Ex.I.A.S., in respect of the subject properties. Hence, he seeks appropriate orders from this Court.

¶5The learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents, by referring to paragraph No.14 of the report submitted by the Tahsildar, Ponneri, submitted that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr. H.M. Pandey, Ex-I.A.S., in respect of the subject properties.

¶6Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Counsel appearing for the official respondents and perused the materials placed before this Court.

¶7In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this Court is of the considered view that, although the impugned summons had been issued to the petitioner, pursuant to the interim directions of this Court, the petitioner appeared before the Tahsildar, Ponneri, and fully cooperated with the enquiry. Upon completion of the enquiry, the Tahsildar submitted a report concluding that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr.H.M. Pandey, Ex-I.A.S., in respect of the subject properties. The relevant portion of the report reads as follows:- "12. I humbly further submit that, upon perusal of the revenue records and the documents produced by the petitioner, it is found that the petitioner had purchased the aforesaid properties from his vendors, namely, Mr.D.Dhanasekar, Mr.Ramamoorthy though respective power agents and Mr.Selvan, Mrs.Vijayalakshmi, Mr.Nandakumar, Mr.Shankar, Mr.Jayakumar and Mr.Gokulraj by virtue of three registered sale deeds dated 01.03.2024, 17.05.2024 and 02.12.2024 registered as Documents No.3243/2024, 6072/2024 and 15379/2024 on the file of Sub Registrar Office, Redhills, it is further found upon enquiry that the possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid properties are with petitioner and that all the relevant revenue records including Patta Nos. 2045 and 2218 as well as Chitta and Adangal, presently stands in the name of petitioner. Therefore, upon perusal of the above revenue records and the documents produced by the petitioner, it is found that the Petitioner's vendors had purchased the aforesaid properties in the year 2022 from M/s. Madras Institute of Mind, represented by its Director Mr.H.M.Pandey, and that the petitioner had subsequently, purchased the same properties in the year 2024 from his vendors, namely Mr.D. Dhanasekar, Mr. Ramamoorthy through their power agents and Mr.Selvan, Mrs. Vijayalakshmi, Mr. Nandakumar, Mr.Shankar, Mr.Jayakumar and Mr.Gokulraj vide registered sale deeds bearing Documents No 3243/2024, 6072/2024 and 15379/2024 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Redhills. Hence, based on the available records, it is ascertained that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr.H.M.Pandey in respect of the subject properties."

¶8A careful perusal of the report of the Tahsildar clearly reveals that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr. H.M. Pandey, Ex-I.A.S., in respect of the subject properties. In such circumstances, this Court is inclined to record the findings contained in the report of the Tahsildar, Ponneri, and close the Writ Petition accordingly.

¶9Accordingly, the Writ Petition is closed by recording the report of the Tahsildar, Ponneri, dated 11.11.2025, wherein it has been categorically found that there was no direct transaction between the petitioner and Mr.H.M. Pandey, Ex-I.A.S., in respect of the subject properties. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 08-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Asi To

¶1The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George Chennai 09

¶2The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance And Anti Corruption, City Special Unit Iii Chennai 06

¶3The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Raja Annamalaipuram Chennai 28

¶4The District Registrar Chennai (North) Chennai 18

¶5The Sub Registrar Sub Registrars Office, Redhills Chennai 52

¶6The District Collector Tiruvallur District, Collectorate Tiruvallur 602 001

¶7The Sub Collector Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District

¶8The Tahsildar Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District

¶9The Village Administrative Officer Karanodai Village Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. Asi W.P. No. 35988 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.40251 and 40252 of 2025 08-07-2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.P. No. 35988 of 2025 and W.M.P.Nos.40251 and 40252 of 2025 Nanesh Developers LLP Rep. By Its Partner S.Prathick Kumar, Having Registered Office At No. 5052 Tvh Lumbini Square, Bricklin Road, Vepery Purasawalkam Chennai 07 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. By Secretary To Government, Revenue Department, Fort St.George Chennai 09 2. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. By Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance And Anti Corruption, City Special Unit III Chennai 06 3. The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Raja Annamalaipuram Chennai 28 4. The District Registrar Chennai (North) Chennai 18 5. The Sub Registrar Sub Registrars Office, Redhills Chennai 52 6. The District Collector Tiruvallur District, Collectorate Tiruvallur 602 001 7. The Sub Collector Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District 8. The Tahsildar Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District 9. The Village Administrative Officer Karanodai Village Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for records pertaining to the notice bearing Ref. No. Na.Ka. 1711/ 2025/ Aa1 issued by the 8th respondent dated 28.05.2025 and subsequent notice dated 20.08.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to execute the subject property situated at Karanodai Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District measuring about 9 Acres and 17 cents covered by survey Nos. 32/1A , 32/2A, 32/2B1, 33/3 , 35/1A, 35/1B, 35/2A, 35/2B, 35/2C, 35/2D, 35/3B, 38/1A, 38/1B, 38/2, 38/3A, 38/6A, 38/6C, 41/3 measuring an extent of 4 Acres and 19 cents S.Nos. 32/1B and 32/2B2 measuring an extent of 0.60 cents and S.Nos. 36/1 36/2 36/3 36/4A 36/4B, 36/5 ,37, 42/1 ,42/2, 42/3, 42/4, 42/5, 42/6 and 43 measuring an extent of 4 Acres and 38 cents belonging to the petitioner from the order of confiscation referred to in the impugned notice dated 28.05.2025. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.R.Rajagopal, Senior Counsel for Mr. K.P.Sanjeev Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Pachaiyappan Government Counsel for R1, R6, R7 to R9 Mr.M.Roshan Atiq Government Counsel for R3 to R5 Mr.Durai Gunasekaran Government Counsel (Crl.Side) for R2