Madras High CourtWP/29367/2023dismissed

Rajanand Rajmohan Rao v. The Thashildar

2023-10-11Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.10.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN Rajanand Rajmohan Rao, ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Thashildar O/o The Thashildar Egmore, Chennai - 632 006.

2. Naresh M.Ramachandran ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ, order or direction or any other appropriate Writ in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, or any other appropriate Writ, order or direction in the nature of writ and direct the first respondent to consider the representation dated 25.09.2023 of the petitioner under section 3 & 10 of the Patta Passbook Act, 1983, within the time fixed by this Court by issuing patta to land together with building thereon measuring to an extent of 4858 sq.ft situated at bearing plot No.A-78, T.Survey No.74/52 at block No.6, Kilpauk Garden Colony, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010 in favour of the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Rajasekhar For R1 : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 25.09.2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner is that he has made a representation dated 25.09.2023 before the first respondent to issue patta in the name of the petitioner, by deleting the name of the second respondent in the patta. In his representation itself, he has stated that he could not apply for patta through E-seva, since the property was already

registered in the name of the second respondent. His further contention is that the name of the second respondent is wrongly registered in the patta. Whether, the patta has been wrongly registered or rightly registered, the same has to be decided only based on records and evidence. Since the dispute is civil in nature regarding validity of title deed, it has to be decided only by the civil court not in a writ petition.

4. Hence the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. However, the petitioner is at liberty to workout his remedy in the manner known to law.

11.10.2023 mfa Index:Yes/No Speaking Order: Yes/No To The Thashildar O/o The Thashildar Egmore, Chennai - 632 006.

P.VELMURUGAN, J.

mfa 11.10.2023