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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 18415

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.SURENDER, J
Geetha – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Viruthunagar District. – Respondent
Writ Petition 226



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.R.Mohanasundaram
For the Respondents: Mr.B.Ramanathan Additional Government Pleader

The court emphasized the need for a timely enquiry into property ownership disputes while ensuring all parties have the right to be heard.

Headnote:The judgment addresses the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226, specifically concerning the cancellation of Patta Nos. in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner's claim is that they are the rightful owners of the said property, having filed for cancellation since no action was taken by the authorities. The court recorded submissions and mandated an enquiry to be completed within sixteen weeks, ensuring all parties impacted are heard. The final order was that there would be no costs involved in the proceedings.

Table of Content
1. writ petition filed for property ownership enquiry. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court mandates enquiry and hearing within a specified timeframe. (Para 3 , 6)
3. representation for patta cancellation and response by government counsel. (Para 4 , 5)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to conduct enquiry and to cancel the Patta Nos. 1348 and 1421 stood in the name of the fourth respondent and to issue patta to the petitioner and her mother in respect of property in Survey Nos.493/1B measruing a total extent of 0.19.0 Ares and 492/1A measuring a total extent of 0.19.0 Ares, situated at Kalathur Village, Watrap Taluk, Viruthunagar District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.08.2025, within a stipulated time as framed by this Court.

2. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the fourth respondent, notice to the fourth respondent is hereby dispensed with.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the absolute owner of the subject properties. However, the Patta relating to the said properties stands in the name of the fourth respondent. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 28.08.2025 to the respondents 1 to 3 seeking cancellation of the Patta and to issue Patta to her and her mother in respect of the subject properties. However, no action has been taken by the respondents 1 to 3. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that an enquiry will be conducted and appropriate orders will be passed on merits and in accordance with law within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

6. Recording the above submission, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to conduct an enquiry and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the fourth respondent and any other persons, who may be affected by such decision, within a period of sixteen weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to 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