Subramani Vs the Tahsildar

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records in Na. Ka No.1638/2024/Aa2 dated 20.12.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd Respondent not to conduct revenue enquiry with respect to the properties in S No.7/4 to the extent of 41/2 cents 6/27C to the extent of 0.21 cents, S.No.7/4 to the extent of 0.05 cents S.No.53/11 to the extent of 0.16 cents situated at Vedukathamapatty Village, Salem district pending before the Civil Court.

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Arun For Respondents : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned notice issued by the 1^st respondent dated 20.12.2024 calling the petitioner for an enquiry based on the application submitted by the 3^rd respondent wherein, the 3^rd respondent has sought for transfer of patta in his name.

¶18

2.Heard Mr.M.Arun, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2.

¶19

3.The main grievance that has been expressed by the petitioner is that there is a suit pending in O.S.No.565 of 2010 against the 3^rd respondent and four others before the Sub Court and the petitioner has sought the relief of partition and 1/6^th share in the subject property and for a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from alienating or encumbering the suit property. When this suit is yet to be disposed of on merits, the application has been submitted by the 3^rd respondent and based on the same, the impugned enquiry notice has been issued by the 1^st respondent.

¶20

2/4

¶21

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

¶22

4.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, it was brought to the notice of

¶23

this Court that the suit has been dismissed for default and is yet to be restored. Under such circumstances, till the suit is restored, there is no bar for the 1^st respondent to deal with the representation made by the 3^rd respondent on its own merits and in accordance with law. Hence, a mere notice issued by the 1^st respondent to the petitioner cannot be put to challenge and it is left open to the petitioner to give his objections before the 1^st respondent which will be considered before passing final orders. Except giving this clarity, no orders can be passed in this writ petition.

¶24

5.This writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

19.02.2025

¶26

Internet : Yes Index : Yes Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order ssr

¶27

3/4

¶28

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

¶29

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.