Remanded

P.Kumar, v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC13 Aug 2018WP/20745/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras disposed of a writ petition seeking cancellation of impugned patta. Granting liberty granted to the petitioner to place claims before the District Munsif, Ponneri, where a suit is pending, directing the court to dispose of it expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to place all claims before District Munsif, Ponneri (O.S. No.291 of 2009); directed to dispose suit expeditiously.

P.Kumar, Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.08.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.No.20745 of 2018

¶6

P.Kumar ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Tahsildar,
Ponneri Taluk Office,
Ponneri,
Thiruvallur District.
2.M.G.Ponnusamy
3.G.T.Mariappan
4.G.P.Balaji
5.Dr.Sanjan John
6.Dr.Reena John
7.G.Ppurushothman
8.V.Vasudevan ... Respondents

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 26.05.2015 and consequently direct the first respondent to cancel the impugned patta viz. Patta No.5438 belongs to the fifth and sixth proposed respondents and Patta No.5394 belongs to one LAKSHMI (Died), D/o.Sankaravel.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Kannadasan
For Respondents : Mr.J.Ramesh, AGP
ORDER

¶9

Mr.J.Ramesh, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the first respondent.

¶10

2.By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶11

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

¶12

3.The petitioner has come up with this petition seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider his representation dated 26.05.2015 and to cancel the impugned patta viz. Patta No.5438 belongs to the fifth and sixth respondents and Patta No.5394 belongs to one LAKSHMI (Died), D/o.Sankaravel.

¶13

4.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice, if the petitioner is granted liberty to place all the claims before the District Munsif, Ponneri, where his suit in O.S. No.291 of 2009 is pending.

¶14

5.Considering the submission made by the learned counsel
for the petitioner, this Court, disposes of the writ petition
granting such liberty to the petitioner. The District Munsif,
Ponneri is directed to dispose of the suit in O.S. No.291 of
2009 as expeditiously as possible since the suit itself came to
be filed in the year 2009. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
vga
To
1. The District Munsif,
Ponneri.
2. The Tahsildar,
Ponneri Taluk Office,
Thiruvallur District.
+1cc to Mr.E.Kannadasan Advocate, S.R.No. 55634
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No. 56103
W.P.No.20745 of 2018

¶15

VSNII(CO) GN(04/09/2018)

¶16

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

P.Kumar, v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Kumar, 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

The Tamilnadu Power Producers Vs State of Tamilnadu

Mrs.Hayath Bee Vs State of Tamilnadu

K.Kamaraj Vs the Chairman and Managing

G.Senthil Kumar,S/o.Gurusamy Vs The District Registrar, office

Mrs.Visranthamma Vs The Tahsildar

Dr.K.R.Chitra, Vs The District Collector