Dismissed

V.Shamugapriya v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC6 Jun 2017WP(MD)/10400/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the Respondent Revenue Divisional Officer to dispose of the petitioner's pending agricultural income tax appeal within eight weeks, giving notice to interested parties, without deciding the merits of the claim regarding property ownership.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer to dispose of the pending appeal within eight weeks after giving notice.

V.Shamugapriya Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED 06.06.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶6

W.P(MD)No.10400 of 2017

¶7

V.Shanmugapriya .. Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Madurai-20 .. Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation, dated 10.4.2017 and dispose the proceeding in Na.Ka.No.5145/2016/N, dated 09.11.2016 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.C.Deepak For Respondent : Mr.M.Alagathevan Spl.Govt.Pleader

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to consider the Petitioner's representation, dated 10.4.2017 and dispose the proceeding in Na.Ka.No.5145/2016, dated 09.11.2016 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶14

2.Mr.M.Alagathevan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondent.

¶15

3.By consent of both parties, the main Writ Petition is taken up for disposal, at the admission stage itself.

¶16

4.The case of the Petitioner is that she is the absolute owner of the property in new Survey No.37/3A1 situated at Thankankulam Village, Madurai District, by virtue of sale deed registered as Document No.7063/2009. The Petitioner had purchased the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ property from one S.Aruvagam., S.Periyakaruppan and S.Muthumari. The Petitioner would allege that wrong entries have been made in

¶17

¶18

FMB and based on the wrong entry, patta in respect of the Petitioner's property was issued in the name of one Senthamarai. Aggrieved over the same, the Petitioner preferred an appeal before the respondent. Since the said appeal was not disposed of till date, the Petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition for the relief stated supra.

¶19

5.Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the respondent to consider the appeal preferred by the Petitioner in Na.Ka.No.5145/2016, dated 9.11.2016,on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders on the same, after giving notice to the Petitioner and other interested parties, if any, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

6.With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar (Records)

¶23

/True Copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Office of the Revenue Divisional Office, Madurai-20

¶27

1 CC TO Mr.C.DEEPAK, ADVOCATE IN SR No. 58685

¶28

1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER IN SR No. 59260

¶29

VSN

¶30

TE/SKN/SAR-II : 13/06/2017 : 2P/4C

¶31

W.P(MD)No.10400 of 2017

¶32

06.06.2017

¶33

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

V.Shamugapriya v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Shamugapriya v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

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

S. Tamilselvan Vs the Director

Tmt.a.Christilda, Vs the Deputy Director of Town

P.Eswaran, S/O.Pethanasamy Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

S.Gunaseelan S/O Late Seeni Vs the Inspector General of

S.Manokaran, Vs the Tahsildar

M.Rasakani, S/O.Mayandi Nadar Vs the Inspector General of