Disposed

P.Chinnamuthu, v. the Tahsildar

Madras HC1 Nov 2019WP/16922/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras disposed of a writ petition filed under Article 226 seeking direction to issue patta for agricultural land purchased by the petitioner. The court granted liberty to file a fresh application and directed the respondent to dispose of it within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to file fresh application; respondent directed to consider and pass orders within 12 weeks.

P.Chinnamuthu, Vs the Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

Dated :: 01.11.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P. No. 16922 of 2012 and MP..No.1 of 2012

¶6

P. Chinnamuthu ... Petitioner Vs. The Tahsildar Sankarapuram Taluk Villupuram District ... Respondent

¶7

Writ Petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to take immediate steps to issue patta in respect of the land of an extent of 3 Acres & 50 Cents out of 5 Acres 68 Cents in Survey No.211/2 of Oomakkanikadu, No.164 Malliampadi Village Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District in favour of the petitioner.

¶8

For petitioner ... Mr.K. Venkatasubba Raju For respondents ... Mr. A. N. Thambidurai, Special Government Pleader

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

With the consent of both the parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶11

The petitioner filed this Writ Petition seeking direction to direct the respondent to take immediate steps to issue patta in respect of the land of an extent of 3 Acres & 50 Cents out of 5 Acres 68 Cents in Survey No.211/2 of Oomakkanikadu, No.164 Malliampadi Village Sankarapuram Taluk, Villupuram District in favour of the petitioner.

¶12

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner purchased 3 Acres 50 Cents in Survey No.21/2 Oomakkanikkadu, No.164 Malliampadi Village, Sankarapuram Taluk, by Sale Deed dated 20.02.198 (Document No.134 of 1986- SRO, Vadakkanatham). The said property was purchased by the petitioner by paying valid consideration from original owners. Thereafter the petitioner submitted a representation on 30.04.2012 to issue

¶13

1/2

¶14

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

¶15

Patta in the petitioner's name. Till date his representation was not considered. Hence the present Writ Petition is filed.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be suffice to consider the representation dated 30.04.2012 for issuing patta within a reasonable time.

¶17

Mr. A.N. Thambidurai, learned Special Government Pleader, agrees to dispose of the representation if any filed by the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that if the representation is not available, liberty is granted to the petitioner to make fresh application for grant of patta and if any such application is filed by the petitioner, the respondent is directed to consider and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

The Tahsildar Sankarapuram Taluk Villupuram District

¶25

+1 cc to M/s.K.Venkatasubbaraju,Advocate Sr.No. 91433

¶26

AKM/08.01.2020/2P-3C /

¶27

W.P. No. 16922 of 2012 and MP..No.1 of 2012

¶28

2/2

¶29

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

P.Chinnamuthu, v. the Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Chinnamuthu, v. the Tahsildar

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.Subash Chand Bafna Vs the Inspector General of

M.Jagadeesan Vs The Union of iNdia

R.Raghavan, Vs the Assistance Executive

E.Murugan Vs The President

J.Jambu Vs G.Vediyappan

C.Venkatachalam, Vs the Tahsildar