SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 12835

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J
K.R.Phoornaraj – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar – Respondent


O R D E R

By consent of both sides, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

2.This writ petition has been filed challenging the rejection letter of the 2nd respondent dated 05.02.2019 and for a consequential direction to the 2nd respondent to make the necessary corrections in the document as per the revenue records.

3.The case of the petitioner is that, he purchased the property by registered sale deed on 25.05.2018 in three survey numbers. At the time of registration, the survey numbers were mentioned as 47/A1 and 47/A2 whereas it should have been mentioned in the records as 47A/1 and

47A/2. This came to be known to the petitioner when he approached the 1st respondent seeking for patta. Since, the 1st respondent found that the survey numbers has been wrongly mentioned in the document, the petitioner approached the 2nd respondent by making a representation to correct the error that has crept in the document. The 2nd respondent, on receipt of the representation, has informed the petitioner that such a correction cannot be made in the document and that their system is incapable of making such an alpha and numeric corrections.

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing on beha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top