Disposed

Mr.Parampil Alexander v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC4 Dec 2015WP/38523/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, heard three writ petitions filed to direct the Tahsildar to consider pending applications for Patta issuance. The court directed the respondent to pass appropriate orders on the petitions within eight weeks after affording an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were disposed of; the respondent direction to pass appropriate orders within eight weeks was issued.

Mr.Parampil Alexander Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.12.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

W.P. Nos. 38523, 38524 and 38525 of 2015

¶6

Mr. Parampil Alexander, 2. Mrs. Renu Ann Varughese, 3. Mr. George Parampil, Rep by their power of attorney holder Mr.J.Thomas

¶7

...Petitioners in all the writ petitions Vs.

¶8

The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Secretary, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai. 2. The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk Office, Ambattur. ...Respondents in all the writ petitions.

¶9

PRAYER in W.P. Nos. 38523 and 38525 of 2015: These petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to issue the Patta in the petitioner's name in Survey Number 88/7A to an extent of 8100 Sq.Ft. in Orgadam Village, presently Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District in petitioner's application for patta dated 29.06.2015.

¶10

PRAYER in W.P. No. 38524 of 2015: This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to issue the Patta in the petitioner's name in Plot bearing No. 181 to an extent of 588 Sq Ft., in Survey Number 103/5 in Orgadam Village, presently Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District in petitioner's application for patta dated 29.06.2015.

¶11

For Petitioners : Mr.Thomas T.Jacob,

¶12

For Respondents : Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel Addl. Government Pleader

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

COMMON ORDER

¶15

Placing reliance upon the sale deed executed in favour of the petitioners, followed by the general power of attorney documents, the petitioners made an application on 29.10.2015, to the 2nd respondent, seeking for transfer of Patta. As the said request is yet to be considered and appropriate orders are to be passed by the respondent No. 2, these writ petitions have been filed.

¶16

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶17

The question as to whether the petitioners are entitled for Patta or not is a matter to be decided by the respondent No. 2 based upon relevant materials. Suffice, it is to direct the respondent No. 2 to pass appropriate orders on the pending application made by the petitioners on 29.10.2015, seeking transfer of Patta, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners as well as third parties, if any.

¶18

With the above direction, the writ petitions are
disposed of. No costs.
rms Sd/-
Asst.Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
TO
1. The Secretary,
Revenue Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai.

¶19

The Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk Office, Ambattur.

¶20

- 5 CCS TO Mr.Thomas T.Jacob, ADVOCATE SR 65612.

¶21

- 1 CC TO THE GOVT. PLEADER, HIGH COURT, MDS-104. SR.NOS.65572 TO 65574.

¶22

ALA/CO KR/23/12

¶23

W.P. Nos. 38523, 38524 and 38525 of 2015

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mr.Parampil Alexander v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.Parampil Alexander v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Kanmani Vs Union of India

Thulasi Vs The District Collector

K.Thangarasu, Vs The District Collector

N.Harimannan Vs The Superintendent of Police

B.S.Venkatesan Vs The Branch Manager

D.Pazhamalai, Vs The Chairman / Special Deputy