Disposed
Thangamuthu. P v. The District Collector
Madras HCWP(MD)/3697/2024
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 20.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
P.Thangamuthu
... Petitioner
Vs.
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent to effect transfer of patta in favour of the petitioner with
1/5
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
respect to the property situated at Dindigul District, Nilakottai Taluk, Ethilodu village, S.No.163/11 an extent of 26 cents by considering the petitioner's representation dated 27.05.2023 within a time as stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Hariharan Alias Harish
For Respondents : Mr.V.Nirmal Kumar Government Advocate
ORDER
Heard both sides.
2.The petitioner purchased 26 cents of land in Survey No.163/11 in
Ethilodu Village from three persons, namely, Kanniammal, Pappu and Periakkal. They are the daughters of one Veeramalai Gounder. Patta No. 1691 is a joint patta. It pertains to four items of property. Survey No. 163/11 is one among them. The joint patta reflects the names of not only three daughters of Veeramalai Gounder but also three sons of one Ammavasi. Therefore, the petitioner is not justified in straightaway making a request for transfer of patta in respect of the said land in his
name.
2/5
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would however
claim that in Survey No.163/11, the sons of Ammavasi do not have any claim or interest or right. But I cannot straightaway accept the said contention. That is for more that one reason. Admittedly, it is a joint patta and it includes their names also. Secondly, the sons of Ammavasi have not been impleaded in this writ petition. Therefore, the only relief that I can give is to permit the petitioner to make a formal application in this regard before the fourth respondent. In the said application, the petitioner will have to implead the sons of Ammavasi also. After receiving such an application from the petitioner, the fourth respondent shall issue notice to the sons of Ammavasi and thereafter pass order on merits and in accordance with law. If there is consensus among the parties, the petitioner's request can be straightaway granted. If the sons of Ammavasi dispute the stand of the petitioner, then the petitioner has to necessarily move the jurisdictional civil Court. The Tahsildar, Nilakottai is directed to pass an appropriate order on the lines mentioned above within a period of twelve weeks after receipt of application from the writ petitioner.
3/5
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
4.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no
order as to costs.
20.02.2024
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No MGA
To
4/5
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
MGA
W.P(MD)No.3697 of 2024
20.02.2024
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tahsildar should be directed to transfer patta over joint patta land when co-holders were not impleaded in the writ petition?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
P.Thangamuthu
The District Collector, Dindigul
The District Revenue Officer, Dindigul
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Dindigul
The Tahsildar, Nilakottai
G.R.Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court