Madras High Court

Madras HC: Land Already Sold, Rajendiran's Appeal Dismissed

Updated
Nov 25, 2025 10:41 PM
madras-hc-land-already-sold-rajendirans-appeal-dismissed

Summary: In a land dispute case from Villupuram District, the court ruled against Rajendiran, who wanted the court to enforce a deal to buy land. The case involved complicated property deals and claims of being forced into signing.

The Case Begins

Rajendiran, from Pudukadu, filed a case in the High Court of Madras, wanting the court to enforce a deal from March 4, 1999. He said that Perumayee agreed to sell him a piece of land for ₹15,000. Rajendiran paid ₹13,000 upfront and promised to pay the remaining ₹2,000 by March 4, 2000.

"The plaintiff paid Rs.13,000/- as advance and undertook to pay the balance Rs.2,000/- on or before 04.03.2000."

Claims and Responses

Perumayee, the other person in the case, argued that the deal was fake. She claimed that Rajendiran forced her to put her thumbprint on blank papers because they had been enemies for a long time. She also said that the land had already been sold to Mrs. Ranjitham.

"The defendant states that the parties are related and there is longstanding enmity."

Key Questions

The court had to think about several important questions, like whether the sale agreement was real and whether Mrs. Ranjitham, who bought the land later, needed to be part of the case. The court found that the land had already been sold to Mrs. Ranjitham before the case was filed.

"The non-joinder of the prior purchaser therefore assumes significance."

Court's Decision

The court, led by Dr. Justice A.D. Maria Clete, agreed with the lower courts' decisions. The fact that Mrs. Ranjitham was not involved in the case was important, as any decision would be useless without her. The court dismissed Rajendiran’s appeal on November 24, 2025.

"The Second Appeal is dismissed with costs."

Final Notes

The court ruled that Rajendiran could not enforce the sale agreement because the land was already sold to someone else, and that person was not included in the case.

Tags:
Property Rights
Land Dispute
Construction Agreements