Dismissed

Raman.K v. the District Collector

Madras HC16 Oct 2023WP(MD)/3271/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a mandamus to restrain the 4th respondent from releasing a pending sale deed. The court held that since the deed was returned and not resubmitted, the contesting respondent's objections were moot. The petition was disposed of on these grounds without further adjudication.

What did the court decide?

Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

Raman.K Vs the District Collector — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 16.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.2870 of 2022

K.Raman

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶11

2.The District Registrar, Registration Office, Sivagangai District.

¶12

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District.

¶13

4.The Sub Registrar, Joint No.II Sub Registration Office, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶14

5.Subramanian.

¶15

6.Kaleeswaran ... Respondents

¶16

1/4

¶17

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

¶18

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022

¶19

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of of Mandamus, directing the 4th respondent not to release the pending document No.P/7/2022 on the file of the 4th respondent till the disposal of the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A3/6397/2019 pending before the 3rd Respondent.

¶20

(Prayer is amended vide order dated 16.10.2023 in W.M.P.(MD)No.5212 of 2022 in W.P.(MD)No.3271 of 2022 by GRSJ)

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Bharathi

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani, Spl. Government Pleader for R1 to R4. Mr.M.S.Jeyakarthik for R5.

¶23

ORDER

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 4 and the learned counsel for the fifth respondent.

¶25

2.The contesting respondent submitted the petition mentioned sale

¶26

deed dated 16.02.2022 for registration. It has since been returned. It is stated by the learned Special Government Pleader that it has not been resubmitted. Hence, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022

¶30

petition. If the contesting respondent resubmits the document, the objections of the petitioner will be taken into account by the registering authority.

¶31

3.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

16.10.2023

¶33

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias

¶34

To:-

¶35

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶36

2.The District Registrar, Registration Office, Sivagangai District.

¶37

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivagangai District.

¶38

4.The Sub Registrar, Joint No.II Sub Registration Office, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶39

¶40

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

¶41

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022

¶42

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶43

ias

¶44

W.P(MD)No.3271 of 2022

¶45

16.10.2023 (2/2)

¶46

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

¶47

4/4

Raman.K v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raman.K 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

Rukmani Ammal Educational and Charitable Trust, Vs The Superintending Engineer

Rukmani Ammal Educational and Charitable Trust, Vs The Superintending Engineer

Sabarinathan .a.M Vs The Deputy Inspector General of Registration

Rakku Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

M. Veerappan Vs M. Kannan

P.Baluchamy Vs Thirumal