Judgment : 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. This Original Side Appeal has been filed against the order of the learned single Judge, dated 25.4.2007, made in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, in Company Petition No.130 of 1999. 3. The Company Application, in C.A.No.2283 of 2006, had been filed to direct the Official Liquidator, High Court of Madras, to refund a sum of Rs.54,740/-, to the applicant, in respect of the land in Erasakkanaickanur village, the possession of which had not been given to the applicant, by the Official Liquidator. The learned single Judge had passed an order, dated 25.4.2007, directing the Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, to issue a patta, to the applicant, in respect of 4.83 acres, in survey No.503/2 in Erasakkanaickanur village, Theni District, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order. 4. The appellant herein had filed the present appeal against the order passed by the learned single Judge, dated 25.4.2007, directing the issuance of a patta, to the applicant in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, in respect of 4.83 acres, in survey No.503/2, in Erasakkanaickanur village, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, stating, inter alia, that the learned single Judge had not assigned proper reasons for allowing the Company Application, in C.A.No.2283 of 2006. 5. It had been stated that the learned single Judge had failed to see that the Tahsildar had no power to issue a patta to the applicant, in respect of 4.83 acres of land in S.F.No.503/2 at Erasakkanaickanur village, Theni District, as the said land had already been declared as surplus, under Section 18(1) of the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961, by the land Reforms Department and that possession had already been taken by the state Government, during the year, 1975. 6. It had been further stated that the reasons assigned by the learned single Judge that the Revenue Officials concerned had not raised any objection, during the inspection of the land in question, said to have been purchased by the first respondent herein, cannot be a ground for directing the Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, to issue a patta to the applicant, in respect of the land in question. The learned single Judge had also failed to note that the land in question is not owned by the Company under winding up, as it belongs to the state Government. In such circumstances, the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 25.4.2007, in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, is liable to be set aside. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants had further submitted that the order passed by the learned single Judge, dated 25.4.2007, in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, cannot be sustained, as the land in question does not belong to the Company under winding up and the land in question belongs to the state Government. Therefore, the direction issued by the learned single Judge to the Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, to issue patta, in repect of 4.83 acres of land in survey No.503/2, Erasakkanaickanur village, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, in favour of the applicant, cannot be sustained. 8. Mr. M. Ravindran, the learned senior counsel, appointed by this Court, as Administrator of Anubhav Group of Companies, had submitted that the first respondent is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for by him, for the issuance of patta, in respect of 4.83 acres, in survey No.503/2, in Erasakkanaickanur village, Uthamapalayam, Theni District. If at all, he may be entitled to the refund of a sum of Rs.33,810/-, which is the proportionate value of 4.83 acres of land said to have been purchased by him, during the auction purchase. 9. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, it is noted that the directions issued by the learned single Judge, by his order, dated 25.4.2007, made in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, cannot be sustained in the eye of law. 10. The direction issued by the learned single Judge, directing the Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, to issue patta to the applicant, in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, in respect of 4.83 acres of land, is unsustainable, as the land in question belongs to the state Government. 10. The direction issued by the learned single Judge, directing the Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Theni District, to issue patta to the applicant, in Company Application No.2283 of 2006, in respect of 4.83 acres of land, is unsustainable, as the land in question belongs to the state Government. Therefore, we find it appropriate to direct the Administrator, Anubhav Group of Companies, the second respondent in the present appeal, to refund the sum of Rs.33,810/-, to the first respondent herein, as the proportionate value of 4.83 acres of land said to have been purchased by the first respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Original Side Appeal is allowed, with the above direction. No costs.