Dismissed

K.R.Geetha v. K.Panchavarnam

Madras HC14 Sept 2023CRP(MD)/1847/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench held that the impugned order recording a tenant as a cultivating tenant ceased to have effect upon her death. The petition was closed as no order survives for adjudication; legal heirs must approach authorities to record themselves.

What did the court decide?

None granted; liberty granted to landlord to collect rent from Treasury by obtaining order from revenue officials.

K.R.Geetha Vs K.Panchavarnam — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 14.09.2023

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶5

C.R.P.(MD)No.1847 of 2014 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2014

Dr.K.R.Geetha

....Petitioner

1.K.Panchavarnam 2.K.R.Usha Rani 3.K.R.Venkateswaran through his Power Agent, K.S.Dinakaran 4.K.R.Lakshmirani 5.K.R.Durga Rani

¶10

...Respondents

¶11

(Respondents 2 to 5 were impleaded vide order of this Court dated 21.12.2021 in C.M.P.(MD)No.11009 of 2021)

¶12

PRAYER: The Civil Revision Petition has been filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, to set aside the order made in T.C.T.P.No.25 of 2011 dated 30.06.2014 on the file of the Special Deputy Collector, Revenue Court, Madurai and to allow this Civil Revision Petition.

¶13

For Petitioner :Mr.T.R.Subramanian For R1 :Mr.S.Muniyandi For R2 to R5 :Mr.J.Gunaseelan Muthiah

¶14

1/4

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The present Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the landlord challenging an order passed by the Special Deputy Collector, Revenue Court, Madurai, wherein, an order has been passed directing the cultivating tenant to deposit the rental arrears before the Treasury on the ground that the landlord had refused to receive the rental arrears.

¶17

2.The Revision Petition mainly proceeds on the basis that the said Panchavarnam should not have been recorded as a cultivating tenant at all by an order 22.03.2002. Since the said Panchavarnam is not a cultivating tenant, the landlord had refused to receive the rent from her.

¶18

3.In W.P(MD)No.18213 of 2014, this Court has held that as far

¶19

as recording of Panchavarnam, as cultivating tenant, is concerned, the order has worked itself out after the death of said Panchavarnam. Therefore, nothing survives to be adjudicated in this Revision Petition. As on today, the legal heirs of Panchavarnam have to approach the authorities to record themselves as cultivating tenant. However, liberty is granted to

¶20

2/4

¶21

the landlord to collect rent from the Treasury by obtaining orders from the revenue officials, if they are so advised. The Civil Revision Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

14.09.2023 Index : Yes/No (2/2) Internet : Yes/No

¶23

cmr

¶24

¶25

The Special Deputy Collector, Revenue Court, Madurai. 2.The Record Keeper, Vernacular Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶26

3/4

¶27

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

¶28

cmr

¶29

C.R.P.(MD).No.1847 of 2014

¶30

14.09.2023

¶31

(2/2)

¶32

4/4

K.R.Geetha v. K.Panchavarnam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R.Geetha v. K.Panchavarnam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Loganathan Vs Selvi

Loganathan, Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

N.Ganesa Raja Vs Srimathy

K.Ganesan Vs the Tahsildar Cum Record

Tmt.K.R.Geetha Vs the District Revenue Officer

K.Ganesan, Vs Jamaludeen Hussain