R.Lalitha v. The District Collector

WP No. 36468 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA WP No. 36468 of 2024 R.Lalitha ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The District Collector Virudhachalam District, Virudhachalam.

2. The Inspector General Of Registration The Tamil Nadu Registration Department, No.100 Santhome High Road, Pattinapakkam, Chennai

3. The Sub Registrar Vadalore Sub Registrar Office, Cuddalore District. (r3 Cause Title Amended Vide Order Dated 14.08.2025 Made In Wmp.4388/2025 In Wp.36468/2024 By Ptaj)

4. The Revenue Divisional Officer Virudhachalam, Viluppuram.

5. Manikandan S/o.Loganathan, No.728 Main Road, Kamaraj Nagar, Sepalanatham Village, Viruthachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

6. Santhi S/o.Loganathan, No.728 Main Road, Kamaraj Nagar, Sepalanatham Village, Viruthachalam Taluk, Cuddalore District.

..Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s):

Mr.M.Shimiyon Edwin For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Balathandayutham, SGP __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP No. 36468 of 2024 P.T.ASHA, J.

ssa

ORDER

Today, the matter was taken up for hearing under the caption 'for being mentioned' at the request of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the fourth respondent was wrongly being described in the order dated 10.12.2024 in W.P.No.36468 of 2024 as 'The Revenue Divisional Officer, Virudhachalam, Villupuram' and that it should be corrected as 'The Revenue Divisional Officer, Cuddalore'.

2. However, a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and the writ petition would clearly show that the Revenue Divisional Officer has been described as 'The Revenue Divisional Officer, Virudhachalam, Villupuram'. Therefore, the request of the petitioner cannot be considered without any proper petition for amendment.

03-03-2026 ssa WP No. 36468 of 2024 __________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis