← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/12254/2017disposed of

Tmt.S.Ponnammal, v. The Tahsildar,

2017-07-11Honourable Mr Justice K. Kalyanasundaram2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.P(MD) No.12254 of 2017 S.Ponnammal ... Petitioner -vsThe Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to grant separate Patta to the petitioner with regard to properties situated in Dindigul District, Dindigul West Taluk, Sullerumbu Village in S.F.Nos.588/1A, 588/1D, 588/1E, 588/1B, 588/1G, 588/1C and 588/1F on the basis of her representations dated 08.02.2017 and 20.06.2017.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Karthick Subramanian For Respondent : Mr.G.Muthu Kannan Government Advocate *****

O R D E R

The petitioner has come up with this writ petition for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to grant a separate Patta to the petitioner with regard to properties situated in Dindigul District, Dindigul West Taluk, Sullerumbu Village in S.F.Nos.588/1A, 588/1D, 588/1E, 588/1B, 588/1G, 588/1C and 588/1F on the basis of her representations dated 08.02.2017 and 20.06.2017.

2. Heard Mr.S.Karthick Subramanian, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.G.Muthu Kannan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

3. According to the petitioner, she is an absolute owner of the land to an extent of 2.64 acres in Survey Numbers referred above by virtue of the registered sale deeds dated 08.12.2009 and 30.03.2010. However, the name of one Ponnusamy, S/o.Rasu was also included as joint pattadhar in respect of the said property. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

4. The case of the petitioner is that the said Ponnusamy has no right or title over the said property and the right of the petitioner was also confirmed by the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.371 of 2014, dated 19.08.2016.

5. Mr.S.Karthick Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner approached the respondent to rectify the mistake and for issuance of a separate patta in the name of the petitioner and also sent detailed representations dated 08.02.2017 and 20.06.2017 with all supporting documents. Even then, no order was passed by the respondent. Hence, this present writ petition has been filed.

6. Mr.G.Muthu Kannan, learned Government Advocate would submit that the representation of the petitioner dated 20.06.2017 would be considered by the respondent and suitable order would be passed.

7. In view of the above submissions, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 20.06.2017 on merits and in accordance with law and pass orders, after providing an opportunity to the necessary parties within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

+1cc to Mr.S.Karthick Subramanian, Advocate Sr.No.64630 +1cc to Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No.64947 SM/DSK VB/JC/SAR2/19.07.2017/2P/4C W.P(MD) No.12254 of 2017 11.07.2017 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/