Disposed

Ilayarani v. the District Collector

Madras HC16 Aug 2021WP(MD)/14367/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking patta for land, the Court held that as the validity of private respondents' title via a pending/dismissed civil suit was unclear, the Tahsildar was directed to hear them before passing orders.

What did the court decide?

The Tahsildar is directed to consider the petitioner's representations and pass a reasoned order after providing an opportunity to the petitioner and respondents 4 to 6.

Ilayarani Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.14367 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.08.2021 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY W.P(MD)No.14367 of 2021

¶4

Ilayarani ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur. 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District. 3.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District. 4.R.Ramasamy 5.R.Karnan 6.Thanalakshmi ... Respondents

¶5

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to issue Patta in favour of the petitioner with respect of property comprised in S.Nos.710/4 and 710/5 having area of 4718 Sq.Ft., 438.31 Sq.Mt., at P.Udayapatty Village, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 03.05.2021 and 30.07.2021.

¶6

For Petitioner : M/s.Vilma Rexy For R1 to R3 : Mr.R.Baskaran Counsel for State.

¶7

ORDER

¶8

The petitioner seeks patta in respect of the properties in Survey Nos.710/4 and 710/5 at P.Udayapatty Village, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

¶9

The petitioner traces title to the aforesaid property to a sale deed dated 28.11.1958, bearing Document No.4579/1958 in favour of her father. The petitioner also relies upon the patta in the name of her father, which has been enclosed with the writ petition. The petitioner states that respondents 4 to 6 herein had filed a civil suit in O.S.No.12 of 2017 and that such civil suit was dismissed on 12.03.2021. According to the petitioner, the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

1/3

¶11

W.P(MD)No.14367 of 2021

¶12

civil suit, which was dismissed for default, was not restored. The petitioner submitted representations to the second and third respondents on 03.05.2021 and 30.07.2021 and has filed the present writ petition on account of the failure to act on the basis of the request for patta.

¶13

Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Counsel for the State, accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. He points out that the State is also a party to the suit and that therefore, the Government Pleader at the place concerned would be able to ascertain the current status easily. A communication dated 16.07.2021 from the Government Advocate is also included in the type-set of papers and this communication seems to indicate that no appeal is pending as on 16.07.2021. Nonetheless, the fourth, fifth and sixth respondents may have to be put on notice so as to conclusively ascertain the facts in this regard.

¶14

Accordingly, without going into the merits of the matter, the third respondent herein is directed to consider the petitioner's representations dated 03.05.2021 and 30.07.2021 and pass a reasoned order thereon after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner and to respondents 4 to 6 herein. On account of the fact that the merits of the matter have not been examined and because the third respondent has been directed to hear the private respondents before passing orders, the Writ Petition is disposed of without notice to the private respondents.

¶15

W.P.(MD).No.14367 of 2021 is disposed of on these terms without any order as costs.

¶16

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶17

// True Copy //

¶18

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶19

tsg

¶20

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶21

¶22

1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

¶23

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

¶24

2/3

¶25

W.P(MD)No.14367 of 2021

¶26

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

¶27

3.The Tahsildar, Kadavur Taluk, Karur District.

¶28

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-26512[F] dated 17/08/2021 )

¶29

W.P(MD)No.14367 of 2021 16.08.2021

¶30

PS(CO) GC(25.08.2021) 3P 5C

¶31

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

¶32

3/3

Ilayarani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ilayarani 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

Viswanathan.M Vs the District Collector

Baramath Vs the Passport Issuing Authority

Santhanam.K Vs the District Collector

Rajagopal Vs the Tahsildar

Sabarnisha.K Vs the Tahsildar

Prabaharan.G Vs The District Collector