Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
P.B.Balaji, J
Revathi Mathu – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition challenges jurisdiction of tahsildar's order. (Para 1) |
| 2. court discusses implications of the order and directives for expediting suit. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court disposes of petition with directions. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
The Writ Petition challenges the order of the Tahsildar, Thirumangalam, dated 27.09.2024.
2.Heard Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.C.Satheesh, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.M.Rajaraman, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 and 6.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would invite my attention to the impugned proceedings dated 27.09.2024 in and whereby the Tahsildar, Thirumangalam, has actually granted a partion decree, clearly beyond his jurisdiction. Admittedly, even according to the learned counsel for the writ petitioner and the contesting respondents 5 and 6, there is a suit for partition pending in O.S.No.249 of 2024 before the District Court, Madurai.
4.In view of the above, the order dated 27.09.2024 insofar as clause No.4 is set aside. Insofar as clause Nos.1 to 3, in view of the fair concession of the learned counsel for the petitioner t
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
