Anandhan v. The District Revenue Officer
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners, heirs of a property, approached this court for an individual patta following a June 2024 partition deed, claiming their representation was ignored. The Tahsildar (Third Respondent) directed to conduct an enquiry and pass orders within two months.
What did the court decide?
Direction to the Third Respondent to conduct an enquiry within two months and pass suitable orders.
What the court decided
W.P(MD)No.23961 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 14.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P(MD)No.23961 of 2024 and WMP(MD) Nos.20291 & 20294 of 2024
- Anandhan
- Chinna Anandhan
- Akathian
- Chinna Poosari
- Anandhan
- Anandhan
...Petitioners
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Third Respondent (Tahsildar) is directed to conduct an enquiry regarding the petitioners' application for separate patta based on a partition deed.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Anandhan and Others 1 to 6
- respondent
The District Revenue Officer, Collectorate Campus, Dindigul District
- respondent
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Kambilaiampatti
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Dindigul East Taluk
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court