Madras High Court
D.Vimala Rose vs The District Collector on 11 September, 2025
Author: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Bench: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
W.P.(MD)No.16651 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :11.09.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.(MD)No.16651 of 2025
D.Vimala Rose ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
O/o. District Collector Office,
7a, National Highway,
PSP Nagar, Korampallam,
Tuticorin.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
O/o. District Collector Office,
7a, National Highway,
PSP Nagar, Korampallam,
Tuticorin.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
O/o. Revenue Divisional Office,
Bench Road,
Tuticorin.
4. The Revenue Tahsildar,
O/o. Revenue Taluk Office,
Santhankulam,
Tuticorin. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 4th respondent
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.16651 of 2025
to subdivision and issue separate Patta in S.No.248/1A situated at
Sasthavinallur, Santhankulam Taluk, Tuticorin District by considering
petitioner application submitted in online vide Ref No application Nos.
2022/0105/28/206320 dated 22.10.2022 and 2024/0105/28/332477 dated
23.12.2024.
For Petitioner :Mr.B.Kathiravan
For Respondents :Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman
Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioner seeks a direction to the fourth respondent to
subdivide Survey No.248/1A and provide a separate patta to her.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on sale deed dated
27.01.2014 by which the petitioner purchased ten cents of land in Survey
No.248/1A from Robinson. He further submits that there is no dispute
with regard to the said purchase between the petitioner and Robinson.
According to learned counsel, Robinson had agreed to permit the
petitioner to use a pathway to access her property. Since Robinson
endeavoured to block access to the petitioner, the petitioner filed O.S.No.
20 of 2020 and obtained judgement and decree dated 26.08.2022. By
suppressing the said judgement and decree, he states that Robinson filed
O.S.No.70 of 2023, which was dismissed by judgment and decree dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
07.03.2024. He also admits that A.S.No.21 of 2025 has been filed before
the first appellate court against the latter judgement and decree.
3. Learned Government Advocate appears on behalf of all the
respondents. Based on written instructions, he submits that Survey No.
248/1A is of an extent in excess of five acres. He further states that there
is a boundary dispute between the petitioner and Robinson and that the
request for patta cannot be considered in view thereof, including on
account of the pending appeal.
4. On perusal of the plaint and the judgement and decree in
O.S.No.20 of 2022, it appears that the dispute between the petitioner and
Robinson relates to easementary rights in respect of the petitioner's
property. The judgement and decree in O.S.No.70 of 2023 reveals that
the said suit is to restrain the petitioner from disturbing Robinson's
peaceful possession of the property. Neither suit appears prima facie to
relate to the 10 cents purchased by the petitioner under sale deed dated
27.01.2014. In those circumstances, the pendency of the appeal does not
preclude consideration of the petitioner's request for subdivision and
separate patta.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
5. The petitioner has placed on record joint Patta No.2843. The
said joint patta stands in the names of Robinson, Suresh and the
petitioner/Vimala Rose. It pertains to an extent of 2 hectares 2.50 ares in
Survey No.248/1A. Therefore, the total extent, as submitted by learned
Government Advocate, would be in excess of five acres. Before effecting
a subdivision or considering the request for a separate patta, it is
therefore just and necessary that the joint pattadhars be put on notice and
objections, if any, considered.
6. For reasons aforesaid, this writ petition is disposed of by
directing the fourth respondent to consider the petitioner's request for
subdivision and separate patta in respect of ten cents in Survey No.
248/1A. A speaking order shall be issued in respect thereof within three
months after providing a reasonable opportunity to all the parties
mentioned above. No costs.
11.09.2025
Internet :Yes
Index :No
PKN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
To
1. The District Collector,
O/o. District Collector Office,
7a, National Highway,
PSP Nagar,
Koramangalam,
Tuticorin.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
O/o. District Collector Office,
7a, National Highway,
PSP Nagar,
Koramangalam,
Tuticorin.
3. The Revenue Divisional Officer,
O/o. Revenue Divisional Office,
Bench Road,
Tuticorin.
4. The Revenue Tahsildar,
O/o. Revenue Taluk Office,
Santhakulam,
Tuticorin.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
PKN
11.09.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 07:18:39 pm )
