Allowed¶38

Kaviya v. The District Collector

Madras HC10 Sept 2025WP(MD)/2744/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023; Article 226 certiorarified mandamus; Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Tribunal; RDO order Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J dated 13.04.2022 set aside by consent; Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025; removal of encumbrance certificate entry; Settlement Deed Doc.No.1442 of 2004; Rs.4,00,000 full and final settlement; Palaniyammal v. District Collector Madurai; Kaviya and Rajvishwa; Simmakkal, Madurai property Survey No. 177/2.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed in terms of the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025; impugned order in Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J dated 13.04.2022 set aside; encumbrance entry effected by the Sub Registrar directed to be removed; Joint Memo of Compromise to form part of the order; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶38

Issue for consideration

Whether the order passed by the 2nd respondent in Moo.Mu. 818/2022/J dated 13.04.2022 is illegal and unconstitutional and should be quashed. +2 more

¶16

Court's answer

The impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J, dated 13.04.2022, is set aside.

¶38

Ratio / Principle

This Court allowed the writ petition in terms of the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025, which shall form part of the order.

¶38

Key takeaways

Consequently, the encumbrance entry effected by the Sub Registrar is directed to be removed.ratio¶38

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), P.T.ASHA, J.: Writ petition under Article 226 sought quashing of the order dated 13.04.2022 in Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J of the Revenue Divisional Officer and Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Tribunal Chief Officer, Madurai (2nd respondent), and removal of the corresponding encumbrance entry in respect of the petitioners' property (Survey No. 177/2, Door No.10/19, North Line 3rd Street, Simmakkal, Madurai, 210 sq.ft). At hearing, the petitioners and the 4th respondent (Palaniyammal) filed a Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025: the 4th respondent admitted that the Settlement Deed (Doc.No.1442 of 2004) was executed voluntarily in favour of her daughter Nagalakshmi; accepted Rs.4,00,000/- by demand draft as full and final settlement of all claims; consented to quashing of the order and removal of the encumbrance entry (Document No.13 of 2022 dated 20.05.2022); and undertook not to claim any right, title, interest or possession over the property nor create any encumbrance. Allowing the petition in terms of the memo, the Court set aside the impugned order and directed removal of the encumbrance entry effected by the Sub Registrar; the memo forms part of the order; no costs; connected WMPs closed.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 10.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

Writ Petition(MD)No.2744 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.2511 & 2512 of 2023

¶7

1.P.Kaviya 2.P.Rajvishwa

¶8

..Petitioners

¶9

¶10

The District Collector Madurai District, Madurai.

¶11

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer and

¶12

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizen Tribunal Chief Officer, Madurai, Madurai District.

¶13

The Joint I Sub Registrar Madurai North, Madurai.

¶14

4. Palaniyammal,

¶15

..Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the order passed in Moo.Mu. 818/2022/J dated 13.04.2022 on the file of 2nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and unconstitutional and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to remove the entry of the impugned order from the encumbrance in respect of property situated in Madurai Town, Survey No. 177/2, bearing Door No. 10/19 at North Line 3rd Street, Simmakkal, Madurai to an extent of 210 Sq. Ft.

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Pon Karthikeyan For Respondents : Mr.D.Sasikumar Addl. Govt. Pleader (for R1 to R3)

¶21

Mr.C.Kathiravan (for R4)

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed in Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J, dated 13.04.2022, on the file of the 2nd respondent, and consequently seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to remove the entry relating to the said impugned order from the encumbrance certificate in respect of the property situated in Madurai Town, Survey No. 177/2, bearing Door No.10/19, North Line 3rd Street, Simmakkal, Madurai, to an extent of 210 sq. ft.

¶24

When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent were present. They submitted that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and a Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025 has been filed before this Court. Both parties are present before this Court and have affirmed the terms of settlement. The terms of the Joint Memo of Compromise read as follows:–

¶25

2/6

¶26

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

¶27

W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023

¶28

“a. The 4th Respondent admits and confirms that the Settlement Deed dated 26.08.2004 in Doc.No.1442 of 2004 on the file of the 3rd Respondent was executed voluntarily and legally in favour of her daughter Nagalakshmi, and that after her death, the Petitioners are the rightful successors to the said property.

¶29

b. The 4th Respondent has received a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs only) by demand draft bearing D.D.No. 651659 dated 10.09.2025, State Bank of India, Alanganallur from the Petitioners towards full and final settlement of all her past and future claims over the property.

¶30

c. The 4thRespondent has no objection to allow the writ petition as prayed for, by quashing the order passed by the 2nd Respondent in Moo.Mu.818/2022/J dated 13.04.2022. The 4th Respondent has no objection to the removal of the entry made in the Encumbrance Certificate of 3rd respondent's office in Document No.13 of 2022 dated 20.05.2022, relating to the order of the 2nd Respondent, and to the restoration of title as per the original Settlement Deed, Document No. 1442/2004 dated 28.04.2004.

¶31

d. The 4th Respondent undertakes that she will not claim any right, title, interest, or possession over the said property now or in the future and that she will not interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Petitioners.

¶32

e. The 4th Respondent also undertakes that she has not created and will not create any encumbrance, sale, mortgage, charge, or alienation over the said property. If any

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023

¶36

such transaction is claimed or discovered, the same shall be treated as void and not binding on the Petitioners.

¶37

f. The Petitioners and the 4th Respondent agree that this compromise has been entered into voluntarily, without any force, coercion, or undue influence, and with a full understanding of its legal consequences.”

¶38

In light of the above facts, this writ petition is allowed in terms of the Joint Memo of Compromise dated 10.09.2025. The impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Moo.Mu.No.818/2022/J, dated 13.04.2022, is set aside. Consequently, the encumbrance entry effected by the Sub Registrar is directed to be removed. The Joint Memo of Compromise shall form part of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

10.09.2025

¶40

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

W.P(MD)No.2744 of 2023

¶44

¶45