Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Hon`ble Mr Justice V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
T.R.DHANALAKSHMI – Appellant
Versus
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
Property - Writ Petition - Indian Stamp Act Section 47-A - The court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider the petitioner's representation regarding the cancellation of patta without delving into the merits, emphasizing due process under the Indian Stamp Act.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought cancellation of the patta granted to private respondents, claiming ownership of the property acquired in 1992, alleging lack of notice during the mutation of revenue records which was pending under the Indian Stamp Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court instructed the Revenue Divisional Officer to address the petitioner's representation regarding the patta after notifying relevant parties, ensuring that statutory procedures under the Indian Stamp Act are followed.
Issues: Whether the cancellation of patta to the private respondents was warranted given the pending proceedings under the Indian Stamp Act and lack of notice to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court reinforced the principle of fair notice and due consideration of representations in administrative decisions concerning property rights as per statutory requirements.
Final Decision: Writ Petition disposed of with directions to consider the representation.
O R D E R
Mrs.V.Yamunadevi, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents 1 to 7. Since this writ petition is being disposed of, without affecting the interest of the respondents 8 to 28 in any manner, notice to those respondents is dispensed with. By consent of the parties, the main writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. Seeking cancellation of patta granted to the private respondents, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The petitioner claims that he is the owner of the property pursuant to the purchase made by him on 13.02.1992. According to him, when the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 are pending, the revenue records had been mutated though he is the owner of the property without notice to him. Bringing this to the notice of the Revenue Divisional Officer, he has given a representation on 01.11.2021 and according to him, since the same was not considered so far, he has filed the present writ petition.
4. Without going into the merits of the case, as the power to cancel the patta is available with the third respondent, there shall be a direction to the third respondent to consider the representation filed by the petitioner on 01.11.2021 after giving notice to the parties concerned with the property. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. With the above directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.
There shall be no order as to costs.
30.05.2024 Index:Yes Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : No mk To
1. The District Collector District Collectorate Office Krishnagiri District.
2. The District Revenue Officer DRO Office, Krishnagiri District.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer Sub Collector Office, Hosur, Krishnagiri District.
4. The Tahsildar Taluk Office, Denkanikottai Krishnagiri District.
5. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar Royakottai Zonal Denkanikottai Krishnagiri District.
6. The Revenue Inspector R1 Office, Royakottai Krishnagiri District.
7. The Village Administrative Officer VAO Office, Nellur Revenue Village, Denkanikottai Taluk Krishnagiri District.
V .LAKSHMINARAYANAN . J., mk
30.05.2024
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
