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) 65449

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, J
ASOTHAI – Appellant
Versus
ARUNAGIRI – Respondent
WP No. 42298 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.S.Balamuki
For the Respondents: Mr.P.Ganesan, Mr.V.Annalakshmi

A directive was issued for lawful action on a pending representation regarding property ownership, ensuring fair consideration for all parties involved.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: This writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus. Facts of the Case: The petitioner asserts rightful ownership of a property originally entitled to their mother and challenges the patta issued to the 7th respondent.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation on its merits regarding the patta cancellation.

Issues: The court framed the issue of whether the 2nd respondent acted appropriately upon the petitioner's request.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for fair opportunity to all parties and adherence to legal standards in processing representations.

Result: The court disposed the writ petition with directions for a decision within eight weeks.

Table of Content
1. challenge to patta ownership and petitioner's claims (Para 1 , 3)
2. court directed investigation and response to representation (Para 2 , 4)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to act upon the representation made by the petitioner on 16.02.2025, wherein, the petitioner is seeking for the cancellation of the patta that was issued in favour of the 7th respondent with respect to the subject property.

2.Heard Ms.S.Balamuki, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.V.Annalakshmi, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 6.

3.The case of the petitioner is that the patta originally stood in the name of the petitioner's mother and this property was settled in favour of the petitioner through a registered Settlement Deed dated 05.04.2010. The grievance of the petitioner is that the private respondent has no right or title over the subject property and hence, the petitioner submitted a representation before the 2nd respondent on 16.02.2025 to cancel the patta stand in the name of the 7th respondent. Since the same was not acted upon, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

4.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the materials placed before this Court, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to deal with the representation made by the petitioner on 16.02.2025, on its own merits and in accordance with law after affording an opportunity to the 7th respondent and pass orders, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. 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