Dismissed

Pounraj.C v. the Dist. Collector

Madras HC14 Jun 2022WP(MD)/8287/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed a writ petition challenging the inclusion of third-party purchasers in joint pattadarship records. The Court held that the title dispute involving a private registered will was pending in a civil court, so the action of the revenue authorities cannot be faulted currently.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no cost; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Pounraj.C Vs the Dist. Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.8287 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.06.2022

¶3

CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)No.8287 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.16541 & 6272 of 2021

¶4

C.Pounraj ... Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

1.The District Collector,

¶7

Theni District, Theni.

¶8

2.The Tahsildar, Andipatti Taluk,

Theni District.

3.C.Palraj

4.Deivakani

5.Latchkani

6.C.Chandran

7.C.Muthukumar ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the impugned proceedings 2021/0103/25/055093, dated 17.03.2021 and 2021/0103/25/056392, dated 18.03.2021 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same and to direct the second respondent to restore the original patta standing in the name of the petitioner.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mahesh Babu

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶19

The lands in question were purchased by one Chinna Kalyani Thevar and Petchiammal. The revenue records reflected their names. Both of them passed away leaving behind two sons and two daughters. The petitioner is one of the sons. The respondents 6 & 7 purchased 50% share from the respondents 3 to 5 on 25.11.2019 in a registered sale deed. Based on the same, the names of the respondents 6 & 7 have been entered in the revenue records. This is questioned by the petitioner herein.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition.

¶21

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

¶22

1/2

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.8287 of 2021

¶24

His stand is that even during their life time, his parents executed un-registered Will bequeathing the entire property in his favour. Based on the same, he filed O.S.No.99 of 2019 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Andipatti. The suit was originally filed for the relief of permanent injunction. Subsequently, the suit prayer was amended. Now declaratory relief is sought. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is yet to prove the Will said to have been executed by his parents. The authenticity of the Will is questioned by the petitioner's siblings also. As on date, no reliance can be placed by this Court in these proceedings on the suit Will said to have been executed in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner's name is very much figuring in the revenue records. On the strength of the sale deed executed in favour of R6 & R7, their names have already been included as joint pattadhars. The action of the second respondent cannot be faulted. Of-course, all these transactions will have to necessarily abide by the outcome of O.S.No.99 of 2019 on the file of District Munsif Court, Andipatti. If the petitioner succeeds in proving their Will before the jurisdictional Civil Court, then obviously, these transactions will have to give way.

¶25

With these observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

// True Copy //

¶28

/06/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶29

rmi To

¶30

1.The District Collector, Theni District, Theni. 2.The Tahsildar, Andipatti Taluk, Theni District.

¶31

+1 CC to M/s.T. THIRUMURUGAN, Advocate ( SR-25782[F] dated 15/06/2022 )

¶32

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-26173[F] dated 16/06/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.S. MAHESH BABU, Advocate ( SR-26255[F] dated 16/06/2022 )

¶33

W.P.(MD)No.8287 of 2021 14.06.2022

¶34

SS(23/06/2022) 2P 6C https://h cse rvices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶35

2/2

Pounraj.C v. the Dist. Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pounraj.C v. the Dist. Collector

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

C.Sankaran, Vs the District Collector

Subramanian .v Vs The Tahsildar

Bharathi.K Vs The Inspector General of Registration

D.Poongodi Vs the Junior Engineer

Ramdoss V.G Vs The District Registrar of Societies

Manickam .R Vs The Superintending Engineer (Distribution)