Allowed

Angamuthu v. The District Collector

Madras HC2 Jul 2024WP(MD)/8226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging rejection of patta application for temple land. Court noted a final civil decree declaring land belonging to the temple. Directed grant of patta but stayed new construction, permitting only repairs. Petition allowed on these terms.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings set aside; fourth respondent directed to grant patta as sought; restrained from new construction; renovation permitted.

Angamuthu Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

1 W.P.(MD)NO.8226 OF 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.8226 of 2024 AND W.M.P.(MD)No.7432 of 2024

Angamuthu

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Ramanathapuram.

¶11

The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram.

¶12

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the fourth respondent in Na.Ka.P4/3128/2023 dated 14.09.2023 and quash the same as illegal and thereby directing the respondents to grant patta to the extent of 2 ½ acre in the name of the temple to the land in S.F.No.229/7 situated in Veerasingamadam Village, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram.

¶15

For Petitioner : M/s.J.Madhu

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.P.Thambi Durai, Government Advocate.

¶17

¶18

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

¶19

1/4

¶20

2 W.P.(MD)NO.8226 OF 2024

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

Heard both sides.

¶23

The petitioner applied for issuance of patta in the name of the petition mentioned temple. The petitioner's request was rejected by the Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai vide proceedings dated 14.09.2023 on the ground that in UDR “A” Register, the land has been classified as “Muthuramalingapattinam Oorani. Challenging the said rejection order, the present writ petition came to be filed.

¶24

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner produced a copy of the decree dated 22.06.2009 in O.S.No.7 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif, Thiruvadanai. It is seen therefrom that survey No.229/7 Veerasingamadam has been declared as belonging to the petitioner / temple. The revenue authority does not appear to have filed any appeal challenging the said decree. When the civil Court decree has become final, the revenue authority is obliged to act in accordance with the same.

¶25

The District Collector, Ramanathapuram and the Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai

¶26

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

¶27

2/4

¶28

3 W.P.(MD)NO.8226 OF 2024

¶29

have been shown as defendants in the suit.

¶30

In this view of the matter, the impugned proceedings are set aside. The fourth respondent is directed to grant patta as sought for by the writ petitioner. However, the writ petitioner is restrained from putting up any construction in the petition mentioned land. The temple of course can very well exist. It can even be renovated and repaired. But then, no new construction shall be put up in the petition mentioned survey No.229/7. This writ petition stands allowed on these terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶31

02.07.2024

¶32

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No PMU

¶33

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

¶34

3/4

¶35

4 W.P.(MD)NO.8226 OF 2024

¶36

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

¶37

PMU

¶38

To:

¶39

The District Collector, Ramanathapuram.

¶40

The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram.

¶41

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram.

¶42

The Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai.

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.8226 of 2024

¶44

02.07.2024

¶45

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

¶46

4/4

Angamuthu v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Angamuthu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Senthil Kumar Vs Dr.D.karthikeyan IAS

M.Annalakshmi Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Navaneethkrishnan Vs Inspector General of Registration

Nareshbabu.J.P Vs The District Registrar

Muthirulan Vs The District Registrar

Saraswathi.S Vs The Manager