Chandra G Vs Jeyamani S

Prayer in WMP (MD) No.10886 of 2026: Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and Section 114 of of Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.,) read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, leave may be granted to G.Chandra, W/o. Late. Gurusamy, petitioner/ 3 rd Party to file this review petition against the order dated 02.02.2026 in WP. (MD).No.2369 of 2026.

¶20

Prayer in REV. APLW (MD) SR. No.24333 of 2026: Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 and Section 114 of of Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.,) read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to allow this Review petition against the order dated 02.02.2026 passed in W.P (MD) No.2369 of 2026, Direct impleadment of the petitioner as a necessary party in the Writ Petition and afford her opportunity of hearing, Direct the 4 th Respondent to conduct a summary inquiry into the title documents, including verification of the forged Allotment Letter, and refrain from issuing patta to the Petitioner pending such inquiry and Initiate proceedings for perjury against the Petitioner for suppression of facts and misrepresentation.

¶21

For Petitioner/Review Applicant : Mr. B. Rajasekar

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This Writ Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by Mrs.

¶24

2/6

¶25

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

¶26

WMP (MD),No.10886 of 2026 in REV. APLW (MD) SR.No.24333 of 2026

¶27

G.Chandra, W/o. Late. Gurusamy, petitioner/ 3 rd Party, seeking leave to file the present Review Application against the order dated 02.02.2026 passed by this Court in WP. (MD).No.2369 of 2026.

¶28

2 . The grievance of the petitioner/review applicant is that the petitioner, namely, Mrs. S. Jeyamani, filed a writ petition in W.P. (MD).No.2369 of 2026, seeking a direction to the third respondent therein to issue a ‘Anubandham Patta’ in her favour.

¶29

3 . According to the petitioner / review applicant, she is an affected party in respect of the subject property, however, she was not impleaded as a party in W.P. (MD).No.2369 of 2026 .

¶30

4 . It is seen from the order passed in said writ petition that this Court had merely directed the third respondent to consider the fresh application submitted by the writ petitioner/Mrs. S. Jeyamani, and dispose of the same, in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity to all the parties concerned, within a period of ten weeks

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

WMP (MD),No.10886 of 2026 in REV. APLW (MD) SR.No.24333 of 2026

¶34

thereafter.

¶35

5 . In such circumstances, this Court finds that the Review Application is devoid of merits and does not warrant any consideration. Hence, the Writ Miscellaneous Petition is also liable to be dismissed.

¶36

6 . However, it is made clear that the petitioner/review applicant i s always at liberty to approach the competent authority in the manner known to law.

¶37

7 . Accordingly, this Writ Miscellaneous Petition stands

¶38

dismissed. Consequently, the Review Application in REV. APLW (MD)

¶39

SR. No.24333 of 2026 is also rejected at the SR stage itself.

¶40

09-07-2026

¶41

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶42

klt