Disposed

Adhilakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Madras HC2 Feb 2017WP/26009/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order directs the Tahsildar to consider the petitioners' application for patta expediently within twelve weeks, providing an opportunity to interested parties, without adjudicating the merits of the property dispute.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the respondent to consider the petitioners' application for patta, providing an opportunity to parties, and dispose of it within twelve weeks.

Adhilakshmi, Vs the Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 02.02.2017

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P. No. 26009 of 2013

¶6

Adhilakshmi
2. Chellammal
3. Revathy
..Petitioners
Vs.
The Tahsildar
Taluk Office
Madurantagam Taluk
Kanchipuram. .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to consider and
dispose of the petitioner's application dated 14.02.2011 within
a stipulated period and pass such further orders.

¶7

For Petitioners : Mr. K. Govi Ganesan

¶8

For Respondent : Mr. S. Diwakar,
Spl. Government Pleader
O R D E R

¶9

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking to direct the respondent, to consider and dispose of his application dated 14.02.2011 within a stipulated period.

¶10

According to the petitioners, their paternal Aunt Muthialu Ammal purchased the subject property and was in possession of the property. All the revenue records were in her name. Since she was issueless and her husband pre-deceased her, she executed a Will in favour of the petitioners. On 14.02.2011, the petitioners applied for patta. Although the entire process for issuing the patta is over, the respondent has not passed any orders on their application. Aggrieved by the inaction of the Tahsildar, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶11

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

¶12

Learned Special Government Pleader submitted that if the said application of the petitioners are still pending, the same would be considered, in accordance with law.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Special Government Pleader for the respondent.

¶14

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case, the respondent is directed to consider the application of the petitioners, in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity to the parties concerned, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

The writ petition is disposed of, on the above
terms. No costs.
Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CS III )
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
avr
To
The Tahsildar
Taluk Office
Madurantagam Taluk
Kanchipuram.
+1cc to Mr.K. Govi Ganesan, Advocate Sr. 6826
+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr. 6952
W.P. No. 26009 of 2013
SCD(CO)
VR(03/04/2017)

¶16

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

Adhilakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adhilakshmi, v. the Tahsildar

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

P.K.Uma Maheswari, Vs the Member

Jayalakshmi, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

R.Renugadevi Vs the Secretary to Government

M.Manimaran Vs the Registrar

K.Varadha Rajan Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

G.Renganathan, Vs the State of Puducherry