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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 28304

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.MALA, J
M. Velusamy – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar – Respondent
W.P.(MD) No.29837 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.R.Balakrishnan
For the Respondents:Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Govt. Advocate

A writ petition becomes infructuous if the underlying request is denied by a valid authority prior to adjudication.

Headnote:The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 for survey and demarcation of property, supported by an E-Challan dated 25.10.2023. The respondents provided an order dated 11.12.2024, rejecting the petitioner's request. The court found the writ petition infructuous and allowed the petitioner the liberty to challenge the rejection order as advised. Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks survey and demarcation of property. (Para 1)
2. rejection order from the second respondent presented. (Para 2)

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA W.P.(MD) No.29837 of 2024 M.Velusamy ... Petitioner -vs-

1 The Tahsildar, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District.

2 The Firka Surveyor, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to survey and demarcate the petitioner's property in TS No.8/42C17, Udayachi Group Village, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District, by considering the E-Challan, dated 25.10.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.M.Muthumanikkam, Govt. Advocate.

ORDER

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition for a mandamus, directing the respondents No.1 and 2 to survey and demarcate the petitioner's property in TS No.8/42C17, Udayachi Group Village, Devakottai Taluk, Sivagangai District, by considering the E-Challan, dated 25.10.2023.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents, produced a copy of the order, dated 11.12.2024, passed by the second respondent, rejecting the request of the petitioner for survey and demarcation of the property.

3. In view of the order passed by the second respondent on

11.12.2024, the prayer in the writ petition has become infructuous. Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed, as infructuous. In any event, liberty is given to the petitioner to challenge the order of the second respondent, dated

11.12.2024, in the manner known to law, if he is so advised. No costs.

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 Back to top