J.Vimal Anand Adaikkalaraj v. The District Collector

O R D E R This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated

21.03.2025 passed by the second respondent and seeking to quash the same.

¶2The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the son of the third and fourth respondents. The third respondent executed a Settlement Deed in favour of the petitioner, registered as Document No.5829 of 2022 on the file of the Joint Sub-Registrar, Tiruchirappalli. Subsequently, alleging that the petitioner had failed to maintain the third and fourth respondents, the third and fourth respondents initiated proceedings under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the second respondent. By order dated 21.03.2025, the second respondent directed the sixth respondent to evict the petitioner from the subject property and hand over vacant possession of the same to the third respondent. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.

¶3During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the dispute between the parties was amicably settled. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that a Joint Compromise Memo has been filed before this Court, duly signed by the petitioner and the third respondent. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that, during the pendency of the proceedings, the fourth respondent/father passed away and therefore, the compromise has now been entered into between the petitioner and the third respondent/mother and the same is extracted hereunder: " 1.The petitioner herein is the son of the respondents 3 and 4. The properties in survey no.143/3A totalling an extent of 4050 sq.ft belonged to the third respondent herein by way of her purchase under regd. sale deeds dated 10.11.1989 (doc.no.1801/1989) and 26.03.1990 (doc.no.566/1990). It is respectfully submitted that the respondents 3 and 4, in order to make arrangements for their children intended to settle their properties to their children separately. The respondents 3 and 4 had also executed a regd. settlement deed in favour of the petitioner herein vide document dated 12.12.2022 bearing doc.no.5829/2022 in respect of property in survey new survey no.171/2P and 171/3A (old survey no. 143/3A). Ever since the date of settlement, the petitioner has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the said property as its absolute owner. On instructions of the petitioner, the tenants in the subject property would remit their monthly rents only to the respondents 3 and

4.

¶2Owing to some misunderstanding, the respondents 3 and 4 to lodged a false complaint against the petitioner seeking cancellation of the abovesaid settlement deed. Subsequently, the 2nd respondent vide order dated 29.10.2024 in Mu.Mu.A.1/5388/2024 passed an order cancelling the settlement deed bearing no.5829/2022 standing in favour of the petitioner herein. The Appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said order before the 1st respondent was also dismissed vide orders dated 20.02.2025 in Na.Ka.G1/2688656/2024. Therefore, challenging the said orders, the petitioner herein had filed writ petition in W.P.

(MD).No. 14460 of 2025 before this Hon'ble Court and the same is pending. Subsequently on 21.03.2025 in proceedings in O.Mu.A1/1495/2025, the 2nd respondent passed an order addressed to the 6th respondent for eviction of the petitioner from the said property. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed writ petition in W.P.

(MD).No. 14460 of 2025 and the same is also pending. Pending proceedings, the 4th respondent herein died on 05.02.2026.

¶3Now, the dispute between the parties are resolved amicably at the intervention of friends and relatives. The parties agree on the following terms of compromise:

(i). The 3rd respondent withdraws her complaint given under the provisions of The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. And the 3rd respondent has no objection for setting aside the order of the 1st respondent dated 20.02.2025 in Na.Ka.G1/2688656/2024 and the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 29.10.2024 in Mu.Mu.A1/5388/2024.

(ii). The 3rd respondent admits that the regd. settlement deed in favour of the petitioner herein vide document dated 12.12.2022 bearing doc.no.5829/2022 in respect of property in survey new survey no.171/2P and 171/3A (old survey 143/3A) is true and valid. The 3rd respondent admits that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the said property.

(iii). The Petitioner admits to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- to the 3rd respondent every month towards her maintenance.

(iv). The Petitioner has no objection for the 3rd respondent to reside in the first floor portion of the said building throughout her lifetime. With the following compromise, both the parties have no objection to allow the said writ petitions. Owing to shivering issues, the 3rd respondent is also affixing her thumb impression alongwith her signatures."

¶4In view of the Joint Compromise Memo entered into between the petitioner and the third respondent, the impugned order dated 21.03.2025 passed by the second respondent is set aside and the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo shall form part of this order.

¶5It is made clear that, in the event of the petitioner committing any breach of the terms and conditions contained in the Joint Compromise Memo, the order passed by the second respondent shall automatically stand revived and it will be open to the competent authority to proceed further in accordance with law. Liberty is also granted to the third respondent to file an appropriate petition before this Court, in the event of any violation of the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo by the petitioner.

¶6With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

27.07.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes PKN To

¶1The District Collector, Trichirappalli District, Collectorate, Cantonment Tiruchirappalli.

¶2The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichirappalli, Trichirappalli District.

¶3The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station, Trichirappalli.

¶4The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ponmalai Zone, Trichirappalli. M.DHANDAPANI

,J.

PKN DATED : 27.07.2026

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.07.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and WMP (MD) Nos.10670 & 10671 of 2025 J.Vimal Anand Adaikkalaraj ... Petitioner(s) vs. 1. The District Collector, Trichirappalli District, Collectorate, Cantonment Tiruchirappalli. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Trichirappalli, Trichirappalli District. 3. Sagayamary 4. John Bosco 5. The Inspector of Police, Ariyamangalam Police Station, Trichirappalli. 6. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ponmalai Zone, Trichirappalli. ... Respondent(s) PRAYER : Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 21.03.2025 in Oo.Mu.A1/1495/2025 which was received on 07.05.2025 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr. K.S.Kathiravan For R1 and R2 : Ms.K.R.Shivashankari, Counsel for State For R3 : Mr.V.Dinesh Kumar R4 : Died