Disposed¶39

D.Krishnamurthy v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC9 Apr 2026WP/1883/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mutation of revenue records; writ of mandamus; Article 226 Constitution of India; Tahsildar Tirupur (South) Taluk; Nallur Village survey numbers 628 and 629; pendency of civil suit as ground to defer mutation; partition suit O.S.No.432 of 2020 Principal District Judge Tirupur; alleged forged Will; production and proof of Will before civil Court; status quo pending suit; Madras High Court 2026 Krishnan Ramasamy J.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of: first respondent (Tahsildar) directed to wait until disposal of O.S.No.432 of 2020 and thereafter mutate the revenue records based on the rights of the parties as determined in that suit; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition (WMP.No.2037 of 2022) closed. ¶39

D.Krishnamurthy Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the first respondent (Tahsildar) should be restrained from mutating the revenue records in respect of the suit lands in Nallur Village in the name of the third respondent exclusively until completion of the civil suit in O.S.No.432/2020. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Since the rights of the parties with regard to the subject properties are going to be decided in O.S.No.432 of 2020, the Court directed the first respondent to wait until the disposal of that suit.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

Mutation of the revenue records is to be effected only on the basis of the rights of the parties as determined in O.S.No.432 of 2020.

¶38

Key takeaways

If there is any Will with regard to the subject properties, which are already subject to partition in the pending suit, respondents 2 and 3 were supposed to produce the Will before the civil Court, make a claim and prove its validity; the question of the Will is left to the civil suit.obiter¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Krishnan Ramasamy, J.) disposed of a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus to restrain the Tahsildar, Tirupur (South) Taluk, from mutating revenue records for lands in Survey Nos. 628/1A, 628/1B, 628/1C, 628/2B, 629/1A and 629/2A of Nallur Village in favour of the third respondent exclusively. Holding that the rights of the parties were to be decided in the pending partition suit O.S.No.432 of 2020 (Principal District Judge, Tirupur), the Court directed the Tahsildar to wait until disposal of that suit and to mutate the revenue records based on the rights as determined therein. Observing that any person claiming under a Will over properties already subject to partition must produce and prove the Will before the civil Court, the Court declined to decide the genuineness of the alleged Will. No costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

¶1

WP No. 1883 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WP No. 1883 of 2022 and WMP.No. 2037 of 2022

¶7

D.Krishnamurthy

2. R.Sumathi

..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

The Tahsildar, Tirupur (South) Taluk, Tirupur.

¶12

Jeganathan

¶13

3. Rasammal alias Rasathal

¶14

..Respondent(s)

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, forbearing the 1^st respondent from mutating the revenue records in respect of land admeasuring about 1.26 acres in Survey Nos. 628/1A, 628/1B and 628/1C and 0.89 acres in Survey No. 628/2B and 1.66 acres in Survey Nos. 629/1A and 629/2A of Nallur Village, Tirupur (South) Taluk, Tirupur District in the name of 3^rd respondent exclusively, until completion of the civil suit in O.S.No.432/2020 pending on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tirupur.

¶16

__________ Page1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 1883 of 2022

¶19

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.T.K.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader for R1

¶20

R2 – Notice served – No appearance

¶21

R3 – Not ready in notice

¶22

ORDER

¶23

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of writ of mandamus,

¶24

forbearing the 1^st respondent from mutating the revenue records in respect of land admeasuring about 1.26 acres in Survey Nos. 628/1A, 628/1B and 628/1C and 0.89 acres in Survey No. 628/2B and 1.66 acres in Survey Nos. 629/1A and 629/2A of Nallur Village, Tirupur (South) Taluk, Tirupur District in the name of 3^rd respondent exclusively, until completion of the civil suit in O.S.No.432/2020 pending on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tirupur.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that in the present case, the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents attempting to mutate the revenue records with respect to the subject property while a civil suit filed by the petitioners’ mother is pending in O.S.No.432 of 2020 where the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents also parties. According to the petitioners, the respondents 2 and 3 forged the Will and attempting to mutate the record as if the subject property was provided by the petitioners’ grand father to them, when a partition suit was

¶26

Page2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 1883 of 2022

¶29

filed and the said Will is not even disclosed before the civil Court, that too, when the subject properties has also been mentioned for the purpose of partition. Therefore, according to the petitioners, behind the back, the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents are making an attempt to mutate the revenue records in their names with the help of the 1^st respondent.

¶30

The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent would submit that since a civil suit is pending with regard to the subject properties, unless otherwise the rights of the parties are decided, the 1^st respondent will not mutate the revenue records.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the 1^st respondent. None appeared on behalf of the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents.

¶32

Admittedly, a suit for partition filed by the petitioners’ mother is pending in O.S.No.432 of 2020 where the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents also parties to the suit. If at all if there is any Will with regard to the subject properties, since the subject properties are already subject to partition in the above suit, the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents are supposed to have produced the Will before the civil Court and make a claim and prove that the Will is valid. According to the petitioners, no such Will is produced.

¶33

Page3 of 6

¶34

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

¶35

WP No. 1883 of 2022

¶36

In such view of the matter, as the rights of the parties with regard to the

¶37

subject properties is going to be decided in the civil suit in O.S.No.432 of 2020, this Court directs the 1^st respondent to wait until the disposal of the said suit and

¶38

mutate the revenue records based on the rights of the parties as determined in the said suit.

¶39