Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67453

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
S.Sundari – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu Housing And Urban Development Department, Tamilnadu Urban Habitant Development Board – Respondent

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.C. Kasirajan
For the Respondents: Mrs.K.Indumathi Venkatesh R2, Mr.S.Anitha, SGP R1

Court emphasized the need for timely execution of the sale deed upon satisfaction of dues as per the allotment order.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct execution of a sale deed for an allotted plot. Facts: The petitioner, S. Sundari, argued she paid all dues yet the respondents failed to execute the sale deed despite multiple representations. Findings: The court sought the respondents to consider the petitioner's representations within a stipulated timeframe.

Issues: The court framed the central question of whether the respondents would execute the sale deed.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized timely consideration of the representations and noted the failure of execution as a matter of concern for the appellant.

Result: The court directed the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representations within eight weeks from receipt of the order.

Table of Content
1. writ petition for execution of sale deed based on allotment order. (Para 1 , 2)
2. request to consider representations regarding sale deed. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court directs timely consideration of representations. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner being the allottee in respect of Plot No.71, Lakshmipuram scheme, Velacherry, Chennai-600 042, measuring about 141.10.sq.Mtr.in terms of the Allotment order dated Nil 12.1997 viz. proceedings Se.Mu.No.705/1995-A1 to the petitioner based on her representations dated 26.7.2023, 20.2.2024 and 9.12.2024.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the terms of the said allotment and demand made by the respondent board, the petitioner have paid entire dues. Even thereafter, the respondent did not execute the sale deed in favour of the petitioner, for which, the petitioner made several representations dated 26.7.2023, 20.2.2024 and 09.12.2024 and the same are not considered. Hence, the present writ petition.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court may direct the respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioners representations within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the representation will be considered and orders will be passed within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

5. Heard the learned counsel for both side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the limited request sought for by the petitioner, this court directs the second respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representations dated 26.7.2023, 20.2.2024 and 9.12.2024. within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

7. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67453

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASM.DHANDAPANI, JS.Sundari – AppellantVersusThe Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu Housing And Urban Development Department, Tamilnadu Urban Habitant Development Board – Respondent

Court emphasized the need for timely execution of the sale deed upon satisfaction of dues as per the allotment order.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
S.Sundari – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu Housing And Urban Development Department, Tamilnadu Urban Habitant Development Board – Respondent