Madras High CourtWP(MD)/29243/2023disposed of

Chockalingam.R.M v. Karaikudi Municipality

2026-01-29Honourable Mr Justice R.Vijayakumar5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR WP(MD) No.29243 of 2023 R.M.Chockalingam ....Petitioner Vs Karaikudi Municipality Represented by its Commissioner Karaikudi Sivagangai District

...Respondent

Prayer:Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to accept property tax from the petitioner for his property in Plot No.10A comprised in Sub-divided Town S.No.511/1A1A1A1B having an extent of 4429 sq.ft situated at Sekkalai Kottai Village, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 01.03.2023. For Petitioner :Mr.P.Mani Anandh For Respondent : Mr.E.P.Venkateshwar Standing Counsel 1/5

O R D E R

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus directing the respondent Municipality to accept property tax from the petitioner for his property in Plot No.10A comprised in Sub-divided Town S.No. 511/1A1A1A1B having an extent of 4429 sq.ft situated at Sekkalai Kottai Village, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 01.03.2023.

2.According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, he had filed O.S.No.188 of 2005 before the Principal District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Karaikudi for the relief of permanent injunction with regard to the above said property and the said suit was decreed in his favour. The appeal preferred by Karaikudi Municipality in A.S.No.51 of 2011 before Subordinate Court, Devakottai was also dismissed on 03.08.2012. Challenging the same, Karaikudi Municipality had preferred S.A(MD).No. 382 of 2020 and the same was also dismissed by this Court on 24.09.2020. Therefore, according to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, there cannot be any legal impediment for collecting the property tax from the writ petitioner.

3.Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Municipality submitted that the property in dispute is part of the layout approval in which the plot has been earmarked as park and a public 2/5

interest litigation has been filed in WP(MD).No.4753 of 2024 before this Court to direct the official respondent to retain the said plot as a park and an order of interim injunction has been granted by the Hon'ble Division Bench on 29.02.2024 from converting park into a residential plot. Therefore, in such circumstances, the respondent Municipality is not in a position to consider the request of the petitioner for mutation of the property tax in his name. 4.It is also brought to the notice of the Court that the present writ petitioner is arrayed as 8th respondent in WP(MD).No.4753 of 2024. In such circumstances, it is clear that unless the present writ petitioner succeeds in the writ petition in WP(MD).No.4753 of 2024, the respondent Municipality cannot be directed to collect property tax from the writ petitioner. 5.The writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to approach the respondent Municipality for collecting the property tax depending upon the outcome in WP(MD).No.4753 of 2024. No costs. 29.01.2026 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No msa 3/5

To The Section Officer V.R.Section Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Madurai 4/5

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

msa WP(MD) No.29243 of 2023 29.01.2026 5/5