[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Madras High Court
A.Vijayakumar vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 2 January, 2026
W.P.(MD)No.36607 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 02.01.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDER
W.P.(MD)No.36607 of 2025
A.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Kalayarkoil, Sivagangai District.
3.The Regional Deputy Tahsildar,
Maravamangalam,
Sivagangai District.
4.Rameshkumar ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent not to effect any
mutation the Patta request of the fourth respondent by considering the objections
of the petitioner dated 27.11.2025 and 08.12.2025 and to pass orders therein
within the stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Chengizkhan
For R1 to R3 : Mr.B.Ramanathan
Additional Government Pleader
____________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.36607 of 2025
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus,
directing the second respondent not to effect any mutation of the Patta request
made by the fourth respondent, while considering the objections raised by the
petitioner on 27.11.2025 and 08.12.2025, and to pass orders thereon, within the
time frame to be stipulated 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. According to the petitioner, the property in question originally belonged
to his father and one Pitchai @ Pitchappakone, who was the maternal uncle of the
petitioner's father. After their deaths, the petitioner and the legal heirs acquired
their respective shares and have been in possession and enjoyment of the said
properties. However, one Meenatchi has created a fraudulent sale deed dated
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
18.02.2005, claiming that the legal heirs of Pitchai, namely, Nagalingam and
Punitha, executed the said sale deed. The said Nagalingam and Punitha had no
rights over the property of the petitioner's father. Further, one Jeyakannu has also
created a forged sale deed dated 10.03.1993 in respect of the petitioner's property
in Survey No.290. Consequently, the petitioner and the other legal heirs have
filed a suit in O.S.No.424 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Sivagangai, against the
legal heirs of Pitchai and other individuals who created fraudulent sale deeds,
seeking a declaration that the sale deeds and all subsequent transactions
concerning the property in Survey No.290 are null and void, and for partition.
The said suit is still pending. Meanwhile, the legal heirs of Jeyakannu have sold
the subject matter of the suit property to the fourth respondent, who has applied
for Patta. Therefore, the petitioner submitted objections to the respondents on
27.11.2025 and 02.08.2025. Since these objections have not been considered so
far, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the
second respondent not to effect any mutation of the Patta request made by the
fourth respondent.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents 1 to 3 submits that the validity of the sale deeds in question,
including those purportedly executed by Nagalingam and Punitha, as well as the
forged sale deed executed by Jeyakannu, falls within the jurisdiction of the civil
court. The issues raised by the petitioner, pertaining to the ownership, validity of
the sale deeds, and the right to the property in question, are already subject to the
proceedings in O.S.No.424 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Sivagangai.
6. This Court, after considering the submissions made by both sides, notes
that the issues concerning the ownership, validity of the sale deeds, and the rights
over the property in Survey No.290 are already the subject matter of the ongoing
civil suit in O.S.No.424 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Sivagangai and that any
decision regarding the mutation of the Patta should await the findings of the civil
court in the pending suit.
7. In view of the above, this Court directs that the application for mutation
of Patta filed by the fourth respondent will be considered and disposed of on the
basis of the findings to be rendered by the civil court in O.S.No.424 of 2020.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
Until such time as the civil court renders its judgment, no mutation shall be
effected in favour of the fourth respondent.
8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be
no order as to costs.
NCC : Yes / No (K.SURENDER, J.)
Index : Yes / No 02.01.2026
smn2
To:-
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
2.The Tahsildar,
Kalayarkoil, Sivagangai District.
3.The Regional Deputy Tahsildar,
Maravamangalam,
Sivagangai District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
K.SURENDER, J.
smn2
02.01.2026
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/01/2026 12:45:14 pm )
