R.Paulpandi v. The District Collector

Madras HC8 Apr 2026WP(MD)/9788/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patta transfer; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Survey No.1232; Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty; Vadapudupatty Village; Theni District; representation dated 24.02.2026; notice to rival claimants; enquiry; four months; Tahsildar Periyakulam; District Collector Theni; O.S.No.324 of 2000; A.S.Nos.11 to 19 of 2009; S.A.(MD) No.1129 of 2011; W.P.(MD)No.5688 of 2023; refusal check slip; Sub-Registrar Theni; K.Pandiyan; Dhanalakshmi; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with a direction to the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2026 after issuing notice to the petitioner and any rival claimants, conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law within four months from receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs. ¶¶21

R.Paulpandi Vs The District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶21

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the 4th respondent to act on the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2026 for transfer of patta in respect of the plots in Survey No.1232 of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty, Vadapudupatty Village, Theni District.

¶¶11

Court's answer

The Court directed the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2026 after issuing notice to the petitioner and any rival claimants.

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

The 4th respondent was to conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance with law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Mandamus writ under Article 226 disposed of with directions: the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court (S.Srimathy, J.) directed the Tahsildar, Periyakulam (4th respondent) to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2026 seeking transfer of patta for plots in Survey No.1232 of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty, Vadapudupatty Village, Theni District, after issuing notice to the petitioner and any rival claimants, conducting an enquiry and passing orders in accordance with law within four months of receipt of a copy of the order. Background: title litigation over the survey number had concluded in favour of the petitioner's vendors (suit O.S.No.324 of 2000 decreed on 27.01.2003; appeals A.S.Nos.11 to 19 of 2009 dismissed on 09.10.2009; second appeal S.A.(MD) No.1129 of 2011 dismissed on 11.01.2012, attaining finality), and an earlier writ by K.Pandiyan, W.P.(MD)No.5688 of 2023, against refusal of registration had been allowed. No order as to costs.

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.04.2026

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶4

WP.(MD) NO. 9788 of 2026

¶5

R.Paulpandi ....Petitioner

¶6

Vs 1. The District Collector, Theni District. 2. The District Revenue Officer, Theni. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni. 4. The Tahsildar Periyakulam Taluk Office, Theni District. ...Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.C.Mahadevan For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader For R-1to R-4

¶7

Prayer:

¶8

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 4th Respondent herein to forthwith transfer the patta in favour of the petitioner as per his representation dated 24.02.2026 in respect of the plots in survey No.1232 of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty, Vadapudupatty Village, Theni District.

¶9

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

¶10

ORDER

¶11

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 4th Respondent herein to forthwith transfer the patta in favour of the petitioner as per his representation dated 24.02.2026 in respect of the plots in survey No.1232 of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty, Vadapudupatty Village, Theni District.

¶12

2.1.The brief facts of the case are that the properties comprised in Survey No. 1232 measuring 3 grounds and 51 cents of land of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty. Vadapudupamy Village, Theni District, originally belonged to one Navaneethan. He had sold the entire extent under a registered sale deed dated 24.04.1982 in favour of one Sakunthalal and the said Sakunthalal had sold the entire extent under a registered sale deed dated 14.09.1990 in favour of Dhanalakshmi and patta for the said survey number was also transferred in the name of the said Dhanalakshmi. The entire property was converted into house plots and thereafter was sold to various persons.

¶13

2.2.While so, when the Government tried to interfere with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the respective owners, the owners of various plots filed a suit in O.S.No.324 of 2000 praying for a Declaration and Injunction. The said suit was also contested by the Defendants therein viz. the Respondents herein and by

¶14

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

¶15

judgment and decree dated 27.01.2003, the suit was decreed. Aggrieved over the same, the Respondents herein filed an appeal in A.S.Nos.11 to 19 of 2009 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam. The said appeals were dismissed by the judgment and decree dated 09.10.2009. Aggrieved over the same, Respondents herein had filed a second appeal before this Court in S.A.(MD) No. 1129 of 2011 and by judgment dated 11.01.2012,the Second Appeal was dismissed and the judgment has attained finality.

¶16

2.3.While so, since the patta was not transferred in the name of the respective purchasers from the name of the original owner Dhanalakshmi, an application was made by K. Pandian in the year 2017 for transfer of all the patta. The 2nd Respondent in his the proceedings in August, 2018 observed that all the civil disputes were ended in favour of the petitioner's vendor, orders have been passed and the entire property have been divided into plots and sale deeds have also been registered. Subsequently, when the petitioner's vendor presented the sale deeds for registration, the same was also refused and a writ petition was filed by K.Pandiyan in W.P.(MD)No.5688 of 2023 challenging the refusal check slip. The said writ petition was allowed and the Sub-Registrar, Theni, was directed to register the sale deeds presented within a period of one week.

¶17

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

¶18

2.4.Thereafter, the petitioner herein had purchased various plots in the property consisting of 3 acres and 51 cents in Survey No.1232. Subsequent to the purchase, petitioner herein is in the possession and enjoyment of those plots in the property. The petitioner had made representation to the respondents herein on 24.02.2026 requesting for the transfer of patta in the name of the petitioner. The said representation has also been received by the respondents on 25.02.2026. However, till date, the same not been considered and the patta has not been transferred in the name of the petitioner. The dispute between the petitioner's vendor and the respondents have already been decided and this Court has found the title in favour of the original owners in respect of the entire property consisting 3 acres and 51 cents in Survey No.1232 of Vadaveera Nayakkanpatty, Vadapudupatty Village, Theni District. Since the patta has not been transferred to the petitioner's name, the petitioner is not able to enjoy the property effectively by developing or doing construction in the property. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

¶19

3 .Therefore, this Court is directing the 4th respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 24.02.2026 after issuing notice to the petitioner and the rival claimants, if any, conduct an enquiry and pass orders in accordance to law within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶20

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

¶21

4.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is dispose of. There shall be

¶22

no order as to costs.

08.04.2026

Tmg

The District Collector, Theni District.

¶27

The District Revenue Officer, Theni.

¶28

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam Theni.

¶29

The Tahsildar Periyakulam Taluk Office, Theni District.

¶30

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

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Non-consideration by the respondents of the petitioner's representation dated 24.02.2026 requesting transfer of patta in his name; the patta had not been transferred till the date of the writ petition.¶¶18
The respondents herein (Revenue authorities, Theni District)
Prior proceeding
Owners of various plots filed suit O.S.No.324 of 2000 for declaration and injunction when the Government tried to interfere with their possession; defendants were the present respondents.¶¶13
Prior proceeding
Suit O.S.No.324 of 2000 decreed by judgment and decree dated 27.01.2003.¶¶15
Prior proceeding
Respondents filed appeals A.S.Nos.11 to 19 of 2009 before the Subordinate Judge, Periyakulam.¶¶15
Prior proceeding
Appeals A.S.Nos.11 to 19 of 2009 dismissed by judgment and decree dated 09.10.2009.¶¶15
Prior proceeding
Second appeal S.A.(MD) No.1129 of 2011 filed by respondents before this Court dismissed by judgment dated 11.01.2012; the judgment attained finality.¶¶15
Prior proceeding
K. Pandian applied in 2017 for transfer of all pattas; the 2nd respondent's proceedings of August 2018 recorded that all civil disputes ended in favour of the petitioner's vendor and the property was divided into plots with registered sale deeds.¶¶16
Prior proceeding
Registration of sale deeds presented by the petitioner's vendor was refused; K.Pandiyan filed W.P.(MD)No.5688 of 2023 challenging the refusal check slip.¶¶16
Prior proceeding
W.P.(MD)No.5688 of 2023 was allowed; the Sub-Registrar, Theni, was directed to register the sale deeds presented within one week.¶¶16
Prior proceeding
Petitioner purchased various plots in Survey No.1232 and made a representation dated 24.02.2026 to the respondents seeking transfer of patta; it was received on 25.02.2026.¶¶18
Prior proceeding
Title dispute between the petitioner's vendor and the respondents already decided; this Court found title in favour of the original owners over the entire property in Survey No.1232.¶¶18

R.Paulpandi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Paulpandi v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arockiya Amalanalini Vs The State of Tamilnadu

R.Sathish Vs The District Collector, Kanyakumari, Kanniyakumari

Syed Ali Bhathusha Vs The District Revenue Officer

G.Vijayalakshmi Vs The District Collector

Alagumani Vs The District Collector

K.Sivajothi Vs The Tahsildar