Disposed

B.Balamani v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC9 Jun 2023WP/6117/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging an order declaring patta shares. It held that since an appellate remedy is available under the Patta Pass Book Act, the High Court will not exercise writ jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to prefer the statutory appeal first.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of. Liberty granted to prefer appeal to Revenue Divisional Officer. Connected miscellaneous petition closed.

B.Balamani Vs The District Revenue Officer — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09-06-2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

WP No.6117 of 2019 And

¶7

WMP No.6943 of 2019

1.B.Balamani

2.B.Gopalakrishnan

... Petitioners

Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore.

¶13

2.The Tahsildar, Sulur, Coimbatore.

¶14

3.Mallika ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 29.06.2016 in D.R.No.2016/12/10/ 000004SD on the file of second respondent and quash the same and

¶16

Page 1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶19

consequently for a direction against the second respondent to cancel the sub division made in Survey No.436/2B9.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alwin Manoj Raj for M/s.RRN Legal. For Respondents-1 and 2: Mr.T.Arunkumar, Additional Government Pleader. For Respondent-3 : Mr.K.Myilsamy

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The order passed by the second respondent dated 29.06.2016

¶23

declaring the patta in the name of the third respondent, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

¶24

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third

¶25

respondent brought to the notice of this Court that in respect of joint family property, an appeal has been filed before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who in turn granted the relief and thereafter, a civil suit was instituted between the parties.

¶26

Page 2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶29

Beyond the reasons stated by the third respondent, the fact

¶30

remains that the order impugned has been issued by the Tahsildar under the

¶31

Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. Thus the petitioner has to prefer an appeal contemplated under the Act.

¶32

All the grounds raised on merits may be raised before the Appellate Authority for adjudication and to redress the grievances exhausting the appeal remedy contemplated under the Act is of paramount importance.

¶33

The Appellate Authority is bound to call for the records and

¶34

adjudicate the issues by affording opportunities to the parties concerned.

¶35

The findings of the Original Authority and the Appellate Authority on merits would be of greater assistance to the High Court for effective consideration of the issues raised between the parties and by exercising the powers Judicial Review. Thus the importance of appellate remedy contemplated under the Statute, at no circumstances, be dispensed

¶36

Page 3 of 6

¶37

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

¶38

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶39

with, since there is gross injustice or miscarriage of justice.

¶40

This being the principles to be followed, the petitioner is at

¶41

liberty to prefer an appeal before the Revenue Divisional Officer under the Act and in the event of filing any such appeal, the same may be adjudicated on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶42

With the above liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶43

09-06-2023

¶44

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No Svn

¶45

Page 4 of 6

¶46

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

¶47

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶48

¶49

1.The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore South, Coimbatore.

¶50

2.The Tahsildar, Sulur, Coimbatore.

¶51

Page 5 of 6

¶52

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

¶53

WP No.6117 of 2019

¶54

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Svn

WP 6117 of 2019

09-06-2023

Page 6 of 6

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

B.Balamani v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B.Balamani v. The District Revenue Officer

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

P.Ashokan Vs The Additional Inspector General of Registaration

M/s .Precision Products Vs The Sub Registrar

M/s.Mahalakshmi Builders, Vs Union of India, Rep. by Secy.

T.Babu Vs The Sub Registrar

M.Mani Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

R.Periyasamy Nadar, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu