Dismissed

G.Manickavelu, v. G.Subramani

Madras HC12 Sept 2017WP/24408/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition challenging revenue record mutations. The court granted permission to withdraw, dismissing the petition with liberty to file applications in the pending appeal, and dismissed a connected miscellaneous petition.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition granted with liberty to appeal; connected miscellaneous petition dismissed.

G.Manickavelu, Vs G.Subramani — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.09.2017

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY

¶4

W.P.No.24408 of 2017 & W.M.P.No.25803 of 2017

¶5

G.Manickavelu

¶6

[ Petitioner ]
Vs
1 G.Subramani
2 S.Sankar
3 The Village Administrative Officer
No.50 Kuppam Village Polur Taluk
Thiruvannamalai District.
4 The Tahsildar
Polur Taluk O/o. At Polur
Thiruvannamalai District.
5 The Revenue Divisional Officer
Cheyyar Division O/o.at Cheyyar
Thiruvannamalai District.
6 The Sub-Registrar
Kannamangalam Arani Taluk
Thiruvannamalai District.
[ Respondents]

¶7

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of declaration declaring the mutation of revenue records effected by the fourth respondent in the name of first and second respondents with respect of pending suit lands comprised in Subdivisions survey number 129/1C 0.36.50 130/2 0.26.50 and 130/5 0.23.50 acres of lands (Patta No. 415) at No. 50 Kuppam Village Polur Taluk T.V.Malai District) as arbitrary and illegal and violation law

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathy

¶9

For Respondents : Mr.S.V.Doraisolaimalai, AGP(R3-6)

¶10

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

¶11

ORDER

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks the permission of this Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file appropriate application before the appropriate authority for reversing the entries made in the revenue records, in the case of the petitioner succeeding in the First Appeal in A.S.No.18 of 2017 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Arni and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶13

In view of the above submission and endorsement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn. In the case of the petitioner succeeding in the First Appeal in A.S.No.18 of 2017 pending on the file of the Subordinate Court, Arni, it is open to the petitioner to file appropriate application before the appropriate authority for reversing the entries made in the revenue records. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

¶14

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rg
To
1 The Village Administrative Officer
No.50 Kuppam Village Polur Taluk
Thiruvannamalai District.
2 The Tahsildar
Polur Taluk O/o. At Polur
Thiruvannamalai District.
3 The Revenue Divisional Officer
Cheyyar Division O/o.at Cheyyar
Thiruvannamalai District.
4 The Sub-Registrar
Kannamangalam Arani Taluk
Thiruvannamalai District.

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.No.24408 of 2017

¶17

+1 cc to M/s.P.Ganapathy Advocate sr 66681

¶18

rr(co) aa12/10/2017

¶19

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

G.Manickavelu, v. G.Subramani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Manickavelu, v. G.Subramani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Hari, Vs The District Collector

L.Ukesh, Vs The District Collecor

Mr.Suresh Bafna Vs the Chairman

N.Murali Vs The Regional Transport

S.Padmanabhan, Vs The District Collector

M/s. S.R. Paper Board Vs The Inspector General of