Dismissed

V.Raju v. the District Registrar

Madras HC6 Oct 2023WP(MD)/4678/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition under Article 226 praying for quashing of a title dispute petition filed in local courts. Petition filed by V. Raju and others against the District Registrar. The petition was withdrawn by the petitioner with court permission.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to withdraw the writ petition; writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

V.Raju Vs the District Registrar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3916 and 3917 of 2022

¶8

1.V.Raju

¶9

2.Kanaga Bai

¶10

3.R.Jebaraj

4.Kireanal

... Petitioners

Vs.

1.The District Registrar, Marthandam Registrar Office, Vettuvanthi, Kanyakumari District.

¶15

2.Shakila Fervin

¶16

3.Shahul Hameed ... Respondents

¶17

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned petition No.247/2022 dated 11.01.2022 pending on the file of the 1st respondent and thereby quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to not to

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022

¶21

interfere in the title dispute pending civil suit in O.S.No.135/2020 and O.S.No.97/2021 regarding Rsy No.531/1A1A1 and 531/3 of Ponmanai Village, Thiruvattar Thaluk, Kanyakumari District on the file of the Principle District Munsif Court, Padmanabhapuram.

¶22

For Petitioners : Mr.G.Cenil

¶23

For Respondents : Mr.M.Sidharthan, Addl. Government Pleader for R1. No appearance for R2 & R3.

¶24

ORDER

¶25

The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of this

¶26

Court to withdraw this writ petition and also made an endorsement to

¶27

that effect.

¶28

2.Permission granted. This writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶29

No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶30

06.10.2023

¶31

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

¶32

2/4

¶33

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

¶34

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022

¶35

To:-

¶36

The District Registrar, Marthandam Registrar Office, Vettuvanthi, Kanyakumari District.

¶37

3/4

¶38

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

¶39

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022

¶40

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶41

ias

¶42

W.P(MD)No.4678 of 2022

¶43

06.10.2023

¶44

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

¶45

4/4

V.Raju v. the District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Raju v. the District Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sundarasu Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Sankaran Vs the Sub Registrar

Kasinathan Vs the Superintending Engineer

A.Thalaiselvi Vs the District Registrar (Administration)

Thalaiselvi a Vs the Deputy Inspector General

Thalaiselvi a Vs the District Revenue Officer Cum Additional District Magistrate