Selvi vs the Tahsildar

SELVI vs The Tahsildar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jan 30, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1496805

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1496805
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose
Decided On: Jan 30, 2026
Case Number: WP/1942/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

SELVI

Respondent

The Tahsildar

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated : 30.01.2026coram :the hon'ble mr. justice abdul quddhose selvi ... petitioner vs.chennai - 600 071. ... respondents prayer : writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent, the tahsildar, avadi, to consider the petitioner’s representation through counsel dated 11.10.2025, the findings of the survey already conducted for the property in survey no.166/3, sekkadu village, and the binding decree of permanent injunction in o.s.no.1016 of 2005, and page no.1 of 4consequently, to initiate appropriate proceedings and issue a patta in the name of the petitioner, mrs.selvi, within a time frame to be fixed by this court. for petitioner : m/s.sb and partners no appearance for respondents : mr.c.jayaprakash government advocate *****ordertoday, the matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal”. there is no representation on the side of the petitioner once again. on the last hearing date, i.e., on 28.01.2026, a representation was made by the learned government advocate appearing for the respondents that the prayer sought for in this writ petition has now become infructuous, since the petitioner has already been evicted from the premises for which survey and demarcation of boundaries is sought for. even on the last hearing date, on 28.01.2026, there was no representation on the side of the petitioner.2. in view of the same, the submission made by the learnedgovernment advocate appearing for the respondents has to be accepted page no.2 of 4 by this court. accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. no costs. index : yes / nospeaking order / non-speaking orderneutral citation case : yes/no sp to chennai - 600 071. page no.3 of 4abdul quddhose, j.sp page no.4 of 4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.01.2026
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Selvi ... Petitioner Vs.
Chennai - 600 071. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent, The Tahsildar, Avadi, to consider the Petitioner’s representation through counsel dated 11.10.2025, the findings of the survey already conducted for the property in Survey No.166/3, Sekkadu Village, and the binding decree of permanent injunction in O.S.No.1016 of 2005, and Page No.1 of 4
consequently, to initiate appropriate proceedings and issue a Patta in the name of the petitioner, Mrs.Selvi, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : M/s.SB and Partners No appearance For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash Government Advocate *****

ORDER

Today, the matter is listed under the caption “for dismissal”. There is no representation on the side of the petitioner once again. On the last hearing date, i.e., on 28.01.2026, a representation was made by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents that the prayer sought for in this writ petition has now become infructuous, since the petitioner has already been evicted from the premises for which survey and demarcation of boundaries is sought for. Even on the last hearing date, on 28.01.2026, there was no representation on the side of the petitioner.

2. In view of the same, the submission made by the learned

Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has to be accepted Page No.2 of 4 by this Court. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Index : Yes / No

Speaking order / Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp To Chennai - 600 071. Page No.3 of 4

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

sp Page No.4 of 4

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties SELVI vs The Tahsildar Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose

Appropriate proceedings permanent injunction Speaking order The premises To initiate high court E la