Disposed

D.Diliraj v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC2 Jan 2023WP/34647/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court directed the Tahsildar to consider a petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2022 and issue a joint patta for property in the name of the petitioner and his two brothers, following a final civil court decree validating their ownership.

What did the court decide?

The First Respondent is directed to consider the petitioners representation dated 05.04.2022 and issue a joint patta in the name of the petitioner and his two brothers within six weeks.

D.Diliraj Vs The Tahsildar — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.01.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

¶6

Writ Petition No.34647 of 2022

D.Diliraj

…. Petitioner

-Vs-

1 The Tahsildar Sholinganallur Tahsildar Office No.1 Rajiv Gandhi Salai Ist Cross Street Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶11

2 The Revenue Inspector Sholinganallur Revenue Inspector Office V6VH Plus 235 Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶12

3 The Village Administrative Officer Sholinganallur-I Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶13

4 Ashok Vargheese

¶14

5 Anand Jacob Vargheese …. Respondents

¶15

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 05.04.2022 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to cancel the patta issued to the 4th and 5th respondents herein and to issue joint patta in the name of the petitioner and in the name of his brothers in respect of the Survey No. 259/2 R.S.No. 259/16 and 259/20 at Door. No. 4/467 A 3rd Street Saminathan Nagar Kottivakkam Chennai-41.

¶16

1 / 6

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶19

For Petitioner : Dr.R.Gouri For Respondent : Mr.R.P.Muruganraja Government Advocate – for RR 1 to 3

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the petitioners representation dated 05.04.2022 and consequently direct the 1st respondent to cancel the patta issued to the 4th and 5th respondents herein and to issue joint patta in the name of the petitioner and in the name of his brothers in respect of the Survey No. 259/2 R.S.No. 259/16 and 259/20 at Door. No. 4/467 A, 3rd Street , Saminathan Nagar Kottivakkam Chennai-41.

¶22

Insofar as the property at Survey No. 259/2 R.S.No. 259/16 and 259/20 at Door. No. 4/467 A, 3rd Street , Saminathan Nagar Kottivakkam Chennai-41, it is the claim of the petitioner and two brothers who have inherited the property and they have been enjoying the same. While so, the private respondents ie., respondents 4 and 5 seems to have made a claim that they purchased the property from third parties. Therefore the petitioner along with his two brothers filed a civil suit in O.S.No.658 of 2006 on the file of the Munsif Court, Alandur for declaration and permanent injunction. The suit was tried and decreed by a judgment and decree dated 22.10.2021, whereby the suit property has been declared as belongs to the petitioner and his brothers and the private

¶23

2 / 6

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶26

respondents herein as well as the other defendants in the suit have been restrained from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property by the petitioner and his brothers.

¶27

However, during the pendency of the suit, the private respondents seems to have made a request to the revenue authorities to mutate the revenue records in their name and patta seems to have been issued in the name of the private respondents. Therefore, in order to cancel the patta in the name of the private respondents and re-issue the patta in the name of the petitioner and his brothers, the petitioner has given a representation dated 05.04.2022 to the 1^st respondent Tahsildar and the said representation since has not been considered, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned

¶29

Government Advocate for the official respondents.

¶30

Learned Government Advocate would submit that, based on the civil court decree necessary action would be taken on the representation of the petitioner dated 05.04.2022 and orders to that effect would be passed making proper mutation in the revenue records by issuance of joint patta in the name of the petitioner and his brothers, if they are otherwise eligible to get the same,

¶31

3 / 6

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶34

within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶35

Having regard to the said submission of the learned Government Advocate and taking note of the facts, where the petitioner is fortified with the civil court decree, which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner has become final, this Court feels that there could be no further impediment for the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.04.2022 in the light of the civil court decree dated 22.10.2021 in O.S.No.658 of 2006 and pass necessary orders with regard to the plea of the petitioner for issuance of joint patta in the name of the petitioner and his two brothers, of course after giving an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the private respondents. The needful as indicated above shall be undertaken within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶36

02.01.2023

¶37

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking Order / Non-speaking order KST

¶38

4 / 6

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶41

¶42

1 The Tahsildar Sholinganallur Tahsildar Office No.1 Rajiv Gandhi Salai Ist Cross Street Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶43

2 The Revenue Inspector Sholinganallur Revenue Inspector Office V6VH Plus 235 Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶44

3 The Village Administrative Officer Sholinganallur-I Sholinganallur Chennai-600 119.

¶45

5 / 6

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

W.P.No.34647 of 2022

¶48

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶49

KST

¶50

W.P.No. 34647 of 2022

¶51

02.01.2023

¶52

6 / 6

¶53

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

D.Diliraj v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Diliraj v. The Tahsildar

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

Vinayakamurthi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Gnanasakthi Jagadeesan Vs Deputy Inspector General of Registration

Gnanasakthi Jagadeesan Vs Deputy Inspector General of Registration

T.Joseph Newton Vs The District Collector

Venkatasamy Vs The District Collector

Neduncheziyan Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer