Dismissed

K.Sivashanmuganathan, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC6 Aug 2021WP/31334/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras dismissed a writ petition filed by K. Sivashanmuganathan seeking a mandamus for the grant of patta over land in S.No. 110/1F. Justice C.V. Karthikeyan held that the representation filed could not yield relief because the respondent revenue authorities established that the land had already been sold to a third party, rendering the mother's subsequent settlement deed non est

What did the court decide?

The writ of mandamus directing the grant of patta was refused; the writ petition was dismissed with no costs.

K.Sivashanmuganathan, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 06.08.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

WP.No.31334/2019

[Video Conferencing]

K.Sivashanmuganathan

... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by the Secretary to Government Revenue Department, Fort St George Chennai-9.

¶11

The District Revenue Officer, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

¶12

The Tahsildar Ulundurpet Taluk Villupuram District. ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer : - Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to modify the entries and issue patta in respect of S.No.110/1F in favour of the petitioner by considering the representation dated 24.06.2019 as per section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Passbook Act, 1983.

¶14

For Petitioner : Ms.K.Jenitha

¶15

For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Government Advocate

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(1) The petitioner herein had filed the present writ petition in the nature of a mandamus seeking consideration of his representation dated 24.06.2019 which representation was given for grant of patta with respect to the lands in S.No.110/1F.

¶18

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

¶19

(2) It is claimed by the petitioner whose mother is Mrs.Indira and father is Mr.C.Kannan, that his mother had settled the property in his name and thereafter, he had approached the revenue authorities seeking grant of patta. In that connection, he had given a representation on 24.06.2019 and since no orders have been passed, it necessitated the petitioner to file the present writ petition.

¶20

(3) The learned Government Advocate forwarded an order of the Sub-Collector, Tirukovilur dated 27.02.2019, in Na.Ka.Aa3/6253/2018, wherein they have stated that the petitioner herein or his mother Mrs.Indira are not entitled for grant of patta. It has been claimed that the mother of the petitioner Mrs.Indira had already sold the property to Narayanan. It is contended by the learned Government Advocate that the writ petition, therefore, cannot be maintained since there is no land for which patta can be granted to the petitioner and that the said land had already been conveyed. It is claimed that subsequent to such conveyance, the mother of the petitioner had executed the Settlement Deed, which naturally is, non est in the eyes of law.

¶21

(4) In view of such categorical statement and in view of such orders, I am afraid that no relief can be granted to the writ petitioner. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(CS-IX)

¶24

// True Copy//

¶25

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶26

¶27

¶28

The Secretary to Government State of Tamil Nadu Revenue Department, Fort St George Chennai-9.

¶29

The District Revenue Officer, Villupuram District, Villupuram.

¶30

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

¶31

The Tahsildar Ulundurpet Taluk Villupuram District.

¶32

+1cc to M/s.Malath Devapriyan, Advocate, S.R.No.39393

¶33

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.39399

¶34

WP.No.31334/2019

¶35

PL(CO) SU(25/08/2021)

¶36

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

K.Sivashanmuganathan, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Sivashanmuganathan, v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

M.Chinnaraj Vs The Inspector General of Registration

S.Dhanasekaran Vs The Sub - Registrar

P.Balakrishnamoorthi Vs The Sub Registrar

A.K.Sriram Vs The District Collector

Smt. Jeyabarathy.J, Vs District collector

M.Ilayaperumal Vs The District Collector