A.Karthick Vs The Tahsildar

A.Karthick vs The Tahsildar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 16, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1838426

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/1838426
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq
Decided On: Jul 16, 2025
Case Number: WP/9742/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A.Karthick

Respondent

The Tahsildar

Excerpt

2025:mhc:2153in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 16-07-2025coramthe honourable mr.justice mohammed shaffiq a.karthick petitioner(s) vs 1.the tahsildar 2.vaidyanathan 3.pushpa 4.prem kumar respondent(s) prayer writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 12.03.2021, after issuing notice to the respondents 2 to 4 herein. for petitioner(s): mr.s.gowri shankar for respondent(s): mr.p.sathish, agp for r1 mr.j.shanmuga sundara babu for r2 to r4orderthe present writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 12.03.2021 submitted by the petitioner.2. however, it is brought to the notice of this court that subsequent to thefiling of the present writ petition, civil suits in o.s.nos.35 and 36 of 2022 has been filed by the respondents 2 to 4 wherein, the petitioner has been arrayed as defendant.3. the learned additional government pleader appearing on behalf of the1st respondent would submit that in view of rule 4(4) of the tamil nadu patta pass book rules, 1987, during pendency of the civil suit between the parties, it may not be permissible to mutate the patta. respondents are precluded from taking any further action in the matter till the civil suit is disposed of by the competent civil court of law.4. in view thereof, this court is of the considered opinion that after thedisposal of the civil suit, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for mutation of patta, if required and which was agreed to by the learned counsel for the petitioner.5. accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. no costs. index:yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderinternet:yes neutral citation:yes/no to the tahsildar mohammed shaffiq j.

Full Judgment

2025:MHC:2153
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-07-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ A.Karthick Petitioner(s) Vs 1.The Tahsildar 2.Vaidyanathan 3.Pushpa 4.Prem Kumar Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 12.03.2021, after issuing notice to the respondents 2 to 4 herein. For Petitioner(s): Mr.S.Gowri Shankar For Respondent(s): Mr.P.Sathish, AGP For R1 Mr.J.Shanmuga Sundara Babu For R2 to R4

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 12.03.2021 submitted by the petitioner.

2. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that subsequent to the

filing of the present writ petition, civil suits in O.S.Nos.35 and 36 of 2022 has been filed by the respondents 2 to 4 wherein, the petitioner has been arrayed as defendant.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the

1st respondent would submit that in view of Rule 4(4) of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Rules, 1987, during pendency of the Civil Suit between the parties, it may not be permissible to mutate the patta. Respondents are precluded from taking any further action in the matter till the civil suit is disposed of by the Competent Civil Court of Law.

4. In view thereof, this Court is of the considered opinion that after the

disposal of the civil suit, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate authority for mutation of patta, if required and which was agreed to by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Index:Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To The Tahsildar MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2025 Same Parties A.Karthick vs The Tahsildar Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq