V.Jayalakshmi v. The District Revenue Officer,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12-09-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI AND WMP NO. 7784 OF 2018
1. V.Jayalakshmi
2. K.Vasudevan Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram Dist., Kancheepuram 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Kancheepuram Revenue Division, Kancheepuram 3.The Tahsildar Sriperumpudur Taluk, Sriperumpudur 4.The Government of Tamil Nadu By Its Secretary - Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9 5.T.G. Ramesh Babu 6.T.G. Sumathi
7.T.G. Renuka Devi 8.T.G. Suresh Babu 9.Chithra 10.T.S. Vikram 11.N.Sampath Kumar 12.Harikrishnan 13.Vijayalakshmi (DECEASED) 14.K.Manikkam 15.B.Rajalakshmi, 16.S.Vasanthi, 17.R.Srikanth (R15 to R17 substituted as LRS of the deceased R13 as per the order dated 01.08.2024 in WMP. No.22384 of 2024 in WP. No.6300 of 2018) Respondent(s) PRAYER;This petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified Mandamus to call for all the records relating to the impugned proceedings Pa. Mu. No. 21368/ 2012/ N-3 dated 18.01.2018 issued by the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram, the First Respondent herein, and quash the same and consequently direct the First Respondent herein to issue patta in favour of the petitioners in respect of the property of 85 cents of lands comprised in Survey No. 95/1 of Sriperumpudur village, Kancheepuram District.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr/J.Thilagaraj For Respondent(s):
Ms.L.Karthiga RR5,6,7 and 9 Ms.R.V.Gayatri for M/s.P.B.Ramanujam for RR11 to 14 R8 - No appearance R10 - Not ready notice Mr.T.M.Rajangam, GA R1 to 4
O R D E R
The Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned proceedings Pa. Mu. No. 21368/ 2012/ N-3 dated 18.01.2018 issued by the District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram, the First Respondent herein, and consequently, direct the First Respondent herein to issue patta in favour of the petitioners in respect of the property of 85 cents of lands comprised in Survey No. 95/1 of Sriperumpudur village, Kancheepuram District.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that one Ramaswamy Naicker bought 85 cents of lands comprised in S.No.95/1 of Sriperumbudur Village from one Ramaprabhanachariar out of the joint family funds by way of sale deed registered as documents No.1640 of 1961. The said K.Ramasamy Naicker had two brothers viz., Kulasekaran Naicker and K.Jaganathan Naicker. There three were in joint possession of the said property. The said property of 85 cents in S.No.95/1 was allocated to Kulasekaran Naicker in the said koor chit, and it was
mentioned in the schedule-B of the said koor chit. One Ramaswamy Naicker had executed a sale deed in favour of one Sarojini Devi and it was registered as doument No.1341 of 1970. In this sale deed K.Ramasamy Naicker had conveyed the said 85 cents in S.No.95/1 despite the fact that it was actually allocated to his brother K.Kulasekara Naicker. Either K.Kulasekara naicker or Janaganatha Naicker was not aware of the said sale. The said property remained to be in possession of Kulasekara Naicker. The said Kulasekara Naicker passed away and the property of the said 85 cents devolved upon his legal heirs. The other legal heirs of one Kulasekara Naicker executed a release deed in favour of Vasudevan, the second petitioner herein. The said release deed was registered as document No.15773 of 2008. Based upon the release deed in his favour, the second petitioner made an application to the second respondent for mutation in the revenue records and for issuance of patta in his name. The same was rejected. Hence, the present petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that without interfering with the impugned order, this Court may permit the petitioner to approach the competent civil Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Counsel appearing for the respondents and perused the materials
available on record.
5. On perusal of the affidavit as well as the impugned order, it is made clear that the claim made by the petitioner is disputed question of facts, which cannot be decided by this Court as well as the revenue officials and the same has to be decided only by the competent civil forum. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel has also seeks liberty to approach the competent civil Court in respect of the subject matter.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the limited relief sought for by the petitioners, this Court, without rendering any opinion on the merits of the case and without interfering with the impugned order, permits the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for mutation of revenue records and issuance of patta.
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed. The period pending before this Court is excluded for the purpose of limitation. 12-09-2025 rli
M.DHANDAPANI J.
rli Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Kancheepuram Dist., Kancheepuram 2.The Revenue Divisional Officer Kancheepuram Revenue Division, Kancheepuram 3.The Tahsildar Sriperumpudur Taluk, Sriperumpudur 4.The Government of Tamil Nadu By Its Secretary - Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Fort St. George, Chennai 9 12.09.2025