The Madras High Court has ordered a Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CB-CID) probe into multiple ownership claims over a valuable piece of commercial land belonging to Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, now renamed as Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board (TNUHDB), at MGR Nagar in Chennai.
Disposing of a 2013 writ petition, Justice M. Dhandapani directed TNUHDB to forthwith cancel the 1993 allotment of 188 square metres of the land to the petitioner K. Veeraraghavan and also cancel a sale deed executed by the Board in favour of one K. Chandrabose in 1995 with respect to 96 square metres of the same property.
The judge directed TNUHDB counsel S. Prabhu to ensure that the board resumes the entire piece of land from the writ petitioner as well as the other individual and their legal heirs within six weeks. Further, the board was directed to lodge a complaint regarding the transactions with the jurisdictional police along with a copy of the court order.
“On such complaint being filed, the same shall be brought to the knowledge of the Greater Chennai Commissioner of Police who is directed to transfer the investigation from the file of the jurisdictional police to the file of the CB-CID for necessary enquiry,” the judge said and directed the TNUHDB to take further action on the basis of the inquiry report.
The judge pointed out that the 188 square metres of the land at K.K. High Road in MGR Nagar had actually been allotted to the writ petitioner under Madras Urban Project Development in 1993 on deposit of ₹89 as token of acceptance. Thereafter, a lease-cum-sale agreement was entered between the board and the petitioner.
As per the terms of the agreement, the petitioner must remit total sale consideration of ₹37,600 in equated monthly instalments over 10 years. However, in 1995 Chandrabose had approached the board claiming that the writ petitioner had sold half of the property to him and sought to register a sale deed in his name.
He produced an unregistered sale deed between him and the writ petitioner to stake claim over the property and the Board too accepted it and registered the property in the name of the claimant though the original allottee had no right to sell any portion of the property until he discharges his liability spread over 10 years.
After paying the total consideration, the present petitioner had moved the High Court in 2013 seeking a direction to the board to register the entire extent of 188 square metres in his name. When the matter was taken up for final hearing now, Justice Dhandapani was shocked over several manipulations having taken place with respect to the property. “This is a classic case of how the official records have been manipulated either for or in detriment of the parties,” the judge said and ordered a CB-CID probe.
