Samiyaththal v. The Tahsildar

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :18.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY Samiyaththal ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Tahsildar, Oddanchatram Taluk, Dindigul District.

2. Selvi

3. Kavitha 4.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani.

... Respondent (R4 is suo motu impleaded vide order dated 18.11.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.32778 of 2025) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent No.1 to remove the names of Selvi and Kavitha from the patta bearing No. 652 and issue patta by including the name of the petitioner and Ponnusamy by considering the representation dated 01.08.2025 within the time frame that may be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr. S.C.Herold Singh 1/5

For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman Government Advocate for R1 & R4

O R D E R

The petitioner asserts that the property in survey No.48/1, Markkampatti Village, originally belonged to his grandfather, Periyanna Gounder. Upon the death of his grandfather, it stated that his father, Kaliappa Gounder, inherited the property. When his father died intestate, it is stated that the petitioner, his brother, Ponnusamy and his mother, Chellathal, were the only surviving legal heirs. Upon noticing that his brother had executed settlement deeds in favour of his wife and daughter in respect of the entire extent of the property, the petitioner states that he filed a civil suit in O.S.No.1339 of 2022. It is also stated that such suit was decreed on 18.03.2025. In those circumstances, the petitioner seeks the deletion of the names of the second and third respondents from the patta in relation to Survey No.48/1.

2. Learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the first respondent. He submits that the Revenue Divisional Officer is the authority vested with jurisdiction to decide the matter. 2/5

3. In view of the above submissions of learned Government Advocate, the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, is suo motu impleaded as the fourth respondent in this Writ Petition. This order shall be issued after carrying out the amendment in this Writ Petition.

4. The Revenue Divisional Officer shall provide a reasonable opportunity to the private respondents and to all the legal heirs of the late Kaliyappa Gounder before taking a decision.

5. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits, this Writ Petition is disposed of on the following terms: i. The petitioner shall submit a representation to the Revenue Divisional Officer seeking cancellation/rectification of patta No. 652 within two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

ii. Within three (3) months from the date of receipt thereof, the Revenue Divisional Officer is directed to consider the petitioner's request and pass orders on merits after providing a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner, the second and third respondents and 3/5

the other legal heirs of the late Kaliyappa Gounder.

6. In view of the fact that the merits have not been examined and taking into account the direction that a reasonable opportunity shall be provided to the second and third respondents, this Writ Petition is being disposed of without notice to the private respondents. No costs. NCS : Yes/No 18.11.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No apd To

1. The Tahsildar, Oddanchatram Taluk, Dindigul District.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Parani.

4/5

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY.,J.

apd ORDER MADE IN 18.11.2025 5/5