Disposed

B.Kanagaraj v. The District collector

Madras HC20 Aug 2020WP/9753/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought a direction for action against a third respondent alleging a forged land patta. Upon hearing, the second respondent submitted that no such patta was ever granted, rendering the court's specific inquiry unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The court recorded the submission of the second respondent that no patta was granted and declined to pass further orders.

B.Kanagaraj Vs The District collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 20.08.2020

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶5

W.P.No.9753 of 2020

¶6

B.Kanagaraj,
S/o.Balasubramanian,
rep. by his Power Agent
K.R.Raghusundar,
S/o.Rajan. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Coimbatore District,
Coimbatore-641018.
2. The Tahsildhar,
Tahsildhar Office,
Perur, Coimbatore-641010.
3. Sarojini,
W/o.Manickam. ...Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution
of India, seeking Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2 nd respondent
to take appropriate action against the 3 rd respondent on the
basis of the representation dated 02.06.2020 and 06.07.2020 sent
by the petitioner within the time fixed by this Hon'ble Court
and pass orders.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Veeraraghavan
For Respondents : Mr.A.Aruldoss, for RR1 & 2
Government Advocate.
O R D E R

¶8

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to take action on the representation made by the petitioner on 02.06.2020 and 06.07.2020 within the time fixed by this Court.

¶9

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

¶10

2.The representation was made by the petitioner only on the ground that the 3^rd respondent has filed a suit before the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore, in O.S.No.1404 of 2019 and in the said suit, she seems to have filed a patta in Patta No.171 for the property situated in S.F.No.342.

¶11

3.According to the petitioner, no such patta was granted in favour of the 3^rd respondent and that the patta itself is a forged document. The petitioner therefore, made a representation to the 2^nd respondent to take action against the 3^rd respondent. Since the same was not considered the present petition has been filed.

¶12

4.When this matter came up for hearing on 28.07.2020, this Court passed the following order:

¶13

“Mr.Aruldoss, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the first and second respondents.

¶14

2.Post this case under the caption 'For orders” on 12.08.2020. In the mean time, the learned Government Advocate is directed to take instructions from the second respondent as to whether patta No.171, dated 31.07.1996 was given in favour of the third respondent.

¶15

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner shall take private notice to the third respondent returnable by12.08.2020.”

¶16

5.Today, Mr.A.Aruldoss, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the 1^st and 2^nd respondents submitted that no patta has been granted in favour of the 3^rd respondent in Patta No.171 dated 31.07.1996 with regard to the subject property.

¶17

6.In view of the specific stand taken by the 2^nd respondent, no further orders are necessary to be passed in this writ petition and it is enough to record the submission made by the learned Government Advocate.

¶18

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶19

//True Copy//

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

The District Collector, Coimbatore District, Coimbatore-641018.

¶24

The Tahsildhar, Tahsildhar Office,

¶25

Perur, Coimbatore-641010.

¶26

The Government Pleader, High Court, Madras.

¶27

+1 cc to Mr.C.Veeraraghavan, Advocate Sr.No.27462 +1 cc to the Government Pleader Sr.No.27413

¶28

W.P.No.9753 of 2020
kk (co)
rr ii (08/09/2020)

¶29

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

B.Kanagaraj v. The District collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Kanagaraj v. The District collector

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.Subramani Vs he Deputy Regisdtrar of cooperative societies

Kannammal Vs The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies

R.Jaisankar Vs The Director General of Training

Rajesh alias Rajesh krishnan Vs The District Registrar

Annalakshmi Vs The District Collector

P.Ramasubburaj Vs The District Collector