The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the mutation of property tax records by the village panchayat. It held that such mutation must be subject to the outcome of the pending second appeal between the parties.
The mutation of revenue records will be held subject to the result of the pending second appeal (S.A. No. 330 of 2023).
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP No. 49233 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19-01-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
WP No. 49233 of 2025
D.Murugan
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of petitioner appeal dated 25.11.2024 preferred against the transfer of registry of property Tax passed by the 3rd respondent vide order M.M.No.2 dated 8.10.2024 dehors the procedure contemplated under Rule 22 of the Tamilnadu village panchayat(Assessment and collection of Taxes)Rules 1969 and to dispose of the same within a time frame
For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Siva For Respondent(s): Mr. M. Shajahan SGP-R1 Ms. R.L.Karthika, GA-R2 & R3 Mr.Arun Anbumani-R4
Page 1 of 4
WP No. 49233 of 2025
ORDER
Heard Mr.K.Siva for the petitioner and Ms.R.L.Karthika for the 1st to 3rd respondents and Mr.Arun Anbumani for the 4th respondent.
2.The grievance of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has mutated the tax assessment records in favour of the 4th respondent. According to the writ petitioner, between the writ petitioner and the 4th respondent, a Second Appeal is pending in S.A. No 330 of 2023 on the file of this Court and hence, the order of mutation requires to be recalled.
3.Between the writ petitioner and few others and the 4th respondent, a suit for declaration of title and for injunction had been presented in O.S.No. 161 of 2013 on the file of the learned District Munsif Court, Dharmapuri. The said suit was decreed in favour of the writ petitioner on 20.09.2021 and an appeal preferred by the defendants 3 to 6 was allowed by the learned Principal District (Subordinate) Judge at Dharmapuri on 01.09.2022. The appeal had been received as A.S. No. 23 of 2021 by that Court. On the strength of the decree of the Trial Court and the Lower Appellate Court, the 4th respondent has mutated the tax assessment records in her favour.
4.The grievance of the petitioner as set forth above is that the 3rd respondent has acted on the basis of the 1st Appellate Court judgment instead of awaiting the judgment in the pending Second Appeal.
Page 2 of 4
WP No. 49233 of 2025
5.The writ petition can be disposed by holding that the mutation of the
revenue records will be subject to the result of the pending Second Appeal.
6.It is needless to add here that the 4th respondent cannot rely upon the mutated revenue records in the pending proceedings as they have come into
being post litem motam .
7.The writ petition is disposed. No costs.
19-01-2026
Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No
Maya
To
Page 3 of 4
WP No. 49233 of 2025
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Maya
WP No. 49233 of 2025
19-01-2026
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether mutation of revenue records on the strength of a decree that is sub judice in a second appeal should be subject to the outcome of that pending appeal.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
D. Murugan
The District Collector (Inspector Of Panchayats), Dharmapuri District
V. Lakshminarayan
Justice V. Lakshminarayan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
