Dismissed¶¶30

Theththan G v. The District Collector

Madras HC4 Jul 2025WP(MD)/18103/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025; decided 04.07.2025 by Justice S. Sounthar. Petitioner G.Theththan vs District Collector Dindigul, Block Development Officer (Administration) Sanarpatti Union, and G.Paraman @ Paramasivam. Mandamus under Article 226 seeking cancellation of free housing scheme allotment and patta No.4792 (Survey No.397/2A1 — 78 cents; Survey No.397/7 — 6 cents) in Koovanuthu Village, based on settlement deeds involving Mangalaguru; representations dated 23.06.2025 and 24.06.2025 unconsidered. Held: claimant to a share in undivided ancestral/joint family property must file a suit for partition before the civil court and seek interim relief there; no writ direction issued. Petition dismissed with no costs.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed with no costs. ¶¶30

Theththan G Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the writ petition was dismissed with no costs.

¶¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether respondents 1 and 2 ought to be directed to cancel the allotment of the free house to the third respondent over the undivided property in Survey No.397/2A1 (78 cents) and to cancel the patta standing in his name over 6 cents in Survey No.397/7 of Koovanuthu Village, upon consideration of the petitioner's representations dated 23.06.2025 and 24.06.2025. +1 more

¶¶20

Court's answer

This Court is not inclined to issue any direction to the respondents to cancel the free-house allotment or the patta; accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed with no costs.

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

If the petitioner has a share in the property, his remedy is to work it out before the civil court by filing a suit for partition, wherein he can also seek appropriate interim relief; the writ Court will not issue any direction to the respondents on this claim.

¶¶29

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus refused — patta/free-house allotment dispute is a matter for the civil court. The petitioner (G.Theththan) sought a direction to respondents 1 and 2 (District Collector, Dindigul District; Block Development Officer (Administration), Sanarpatti Union) to cancel the allotment of a free house to the third respondent (G.Paraman @ Paramasivam) over the undivided joint family property in Survey No.397/2A1 (78 cents) and to cancel the patta (Patta No.4792) standing in the third respondent's name for 6 cents in Survey No.397/7 of Koovanuthu Village, the patta having been obtained on the footing of successive settlement deeds (third respondent to his son Mangalaguru for 26 cents, and back from Mangalaguru to the third respondent for 6 cents); the petitioner's representations dated 23.06.2025 and 24.06.2025 had not been considered. Held: if the petitioner has a share in the property, he must work out his remedy before the civil court by filing a suit for partition and may seek appropriate interim relief therein; the Court declined to issue any direction to the respondents. Writ petition dismissed, no costs (S. Sounthar, J., 04.07.2025).

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025

G.Theththan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Collectorate Complex, Dindigul.

¶11

2.The Block Development Officer (Administration), Sanarpatti Union Office, Sanarpatti, Dindigul East Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶12

3.G.Paraman @ Paramasivam ... Respondents

¶13

Prayer :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the allotment of the free house to the third respondent which is to be constructed in the undivided property in Survey No. 397/2A1 to an extent of 78 cents of Koovanuthu Village and subsequently, the patta standing in the name of the third respondent in

¶14

Page 1 of 5

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025

¶17

the Patta No.4792 of Koovanuthu Village to an extent of 6 cents in Survey No.397/7 of Koovanuthu Village is a fraudulently obtained patta by the third respondent by considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.06.2025 and 24.06.2025.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Baskaran For R1 : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.S.Jeya Priya Government Advocate

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the allotment of free house to the third respondent to be constructed in the undivided property in Survey No.397/2A1 with an extent of 78 Cents of land in Koovanuthu Village. The petitioner also seeks a direction for cancellation of patta stands in the name of the third respondent in respect of 6 cents in Survey No.397/7 of Koovanuthu Village, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 23.06.2025 and 24.06.2025.

¶21

Page 2 of 5

¶22

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

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025

¶24

According to the petitioner, the subject properties are his joint family properties and the third respondent executed a settlement deed in favour of his son Mangalaguru in respect of the 26 cents of land in Survey No.397/2A1. Subsequently, his son Mangalaguru executed a settlement deed in respect of 6 cents of land in the above said survey number in favour of the third respondent. Based on those two documents, the third respondent obtained patta and started construction of building under the scheme of the Government. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner submitted a representation before the respondents 1 and 2 seeking their intervention and cancellation of patta issued in the name of the third respondent and stoppage of the construction. The said representation has not been considered. Hence the petitioner has come before this Court.

¶25

According to the petitioner, the subject properties are the undivided ancestral properties and he is also having a share. The third respondent created certain registered documents and obtained exclusive patta in his name. Based on the said patta, he is attempting to put up a construction under the free housing scheme of the Government. If the

¶26

_________ Page 3 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD) No.18103 of 2025

¶29

petitioner has got any share in the property, it is for him to work out his remedy before the civil court by filing a suit for partition in the said suit. The petitioner can also seek appropriate interim relief. Therefore, this court is not inclined to issue any direction to the respondent.

¶30