Madras High Court

WP/40309/2026 of SUKUMAR Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 6 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

WP No. 40309 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 01-10-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

WP No. 40309 of 2026

CNR: {HCMA012358752026}

Sukumar

S/o.Chinnappan

..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Salem.

2. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar

Salem South, Salem.

..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s online application dated 01.08.2026, seeking mutation of the revenue records and issuance of patta in respect of the property comprised in S.F.No.110/1A3B2, Veerapandi village, Salem District measuring an extent of 32 cents based on the registered Sale Deed dated 15.12.2003 within the time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr.G. Sathish

for Mr.R.Nalliyappan

For Respondent(s):

Mr.B. Karthikeyan

Addl. Govt. Pleader

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s online application dated 01.08.2026, seeking

WP No. 40309 of 2026

mutation of the revenue records and issuance of patta in respect of the property comprised in S.F.No.110/1A3B2, Veerapandi Village, Salem District measuring an extent of 32 cents based on the registered Sale Deed dated 15.12.2003.

2. It is stated that the petitioner is the absolute owner and purchaser of the property comprised in S.F.No.110/1A3B2, Veerapandi Village, Salem District, measuring an extent of 32 cents. According to the petitioner, the subject property originally belonged to one Muthusamy, , who had executed a General Power of Attorney dated 06.11.1998 in favour of another and subsequently a Deed of Cancellation dated 10.04.2000, registered as Document No.40 of 2000. Thereafter, Muthusamy and his mother Kuppayee executed a fresh General Power of Attorney in favour of Palanisamy, which was registered as Document No.41 of 2000.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that after cancellation of the earlier Power of Attorney, the erstwhile Power of Attorney holders purportedly executed three Sale Deeds dated 07.06.2000, registered as Document Nos.937, 938 and 939 of 2000, in favour of Priya and others and that the said transactions cannot affect the petitioner's subsequent purchase under the valid Power of Attorney.

4. It is the grievance of the petitioner that despite his purchase under the registered Sale Deed dated 15.12.2003, the revenue records continued to stand in the names of third parties and, therefore, his name was not incorporated in the

WP No. 40309 of 2026

revenue records. Hence, he submitted an online application dated 01.08.2026 seeking mutation of the revenue records and issuance of patta in his favour. Hence this writ petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that this Court may issue suitable directions to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s online application dated 01.08.2026 seeking mutation of revenue records and issuance of patta in favour of the petitioner.

6. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents, on instructions, submitted that S.A.No.915 of 2015 is pending between the petitioner and other persons in respect of the subject dispute.

7. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

8. In view of the pendency of the above Second Appeal and the rival claims relating to the subject property, this Court is of the view that the petitioner's application cannot be decided mechanically. At the same time, the revenue authorities are required to consider the petitioner's application in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity to all interested persons in the subject property.

9. Accordingly, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider the petitioner's online application dated 01.08.2026 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after issuing notice to the petitioner and all other

WP No. 40309 of 2026

interested parties. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the title or on the rival claims of the parties.

10. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. 01-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No VSI-2

WP No. 40309 of 2026

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J. VSI-2

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer Salem.

2. The Zonal Deputy Tahsildar Salem South, Salem. WP No. 40309 of 2026 01-10-2026

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead