VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

R.Gobalakrishnan v. The District Collector

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
3 July 2026
Bench
Krishnan Ramasamyauthor
Case no.
WP 25373/2026

Judgment

Order This Writ Petition has been filed directing the 2nd Respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2025 and to cancel the patta issued in favour of the 4th respondent in respect of the surplus extent of 3 1/4 cents of the petitioner's property.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner and his wife, Mahalakshmi, owned several agricultural lands situated in Kottakuppam Village, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District, measuring an extent of about 12.38 acres, which included the lands comprised in S.F. No. 89/6B2. The 4th respondent is the adjacent landowner, owning an extent of 54 cents in S.F. No. 37/7, R.S. No. 89/6B1. However, the 4th respondent was erroneously granted a patta for 60 cents by including the petitioner's property. Taking advantage of the said erroneous revenue entry, the 4th respondent interfered with the petitioner's peaceful possession. Page3 of 5

¶3Hence, the petitioner's wife instituted a suit in O.S. No. 70 of 2012, wherein the Trial Court, vide its judgment dated 06.12.2021, categorically held that the 4th respondent is entitled only to 54 cents and the petitioners are entitled to 60 cents in S.F. No. 89/6B2. When the petitioner approached the revenue authorities seeking implementation of the said judgment, the 2nd respondent, vide proceedings dated 02.12.2023, directed the Tahsildar to measure the lands and effect patta changes strictly in accordance with the Civil Court decree. However, the subordinate official failed to implement the same.

¶4In reply, Mr.B.Pachaiyappan, learned Government Counsel who takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3 would submit that the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025 will be disposed of by the respondents within a period of eight weeks.

¶5Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Counsel for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record. Since no adverse order is passed against the 4th respondent, notice to the 4th respondent is not necessary.

¶6In view of the above, this Court directs the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025 on its own merits and dispose Page4 of 5 of the same in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after issuing notice to the petitioner and the 4th respondent.

¶7With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 03-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SK To

¶1The District Collector Villupuram District.

¶2The Revenue Divisional Officer Villupuam, Villupuram District.

¶3The Tahsildar Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District. WPoNo.o25373oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMYoJ. sk WPoNo.o25373oofo2026 03-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY R.Gobalakrishnan S/o.Rangasamypillai, Residing at No.11, Bajanai Koil Street, Peryamudaliar Chavady, Kottakuppam Post, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram- 605 104. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector Villupuram District. 2. The Revenue Divisional Officer Villupuam, Villupuram District. 3. The Tahsildar Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District. 4. D.Gopalakrishnan S/o.Deenadayalan Age not Known No.11/9, Mettu Street, Chinna Mudaliar Chavady, Kottakuppam,Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd Respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 24.03.2025 and to cancel the patta issued in favour of the 4th respondent in respect of the surplus extent of 3 1/4 cents comprised in Survey No.89/6B1 (Old Survey No.37/7) covered Page2 of 5 under Patta No.7618, Kottakuppam Village, Vanur Taluk, Villupuram District, and include the said extent in the revenue records in favour of the petitioner. For Petitioner(s): Mr.R. Saravanan For Respondent(s): Mr.B.Pachaiyappan, Government Counsel for R1 to R3

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.