Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 3909 (MAD)

Vellaiyan Ambalam v. Tahsildar, Ottanchathiram Taluk Office

2014-10-17

M.VENUGOPAL

body2014
Judgment 1. Heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondent. 2. The grievance of the Petitioner is that he made a representation before the Respondent/Tahsildar, Ottanchathiram Taluk Office, Ottanchathiram, to consider his representation dated 23.07.2014, wherein the has sough to cancel the Patta standing in the name of one Kaliappan. Till date, it appears that no action has been taken on his representation, by the Respondent/Tahsildar. 3. In view of the fact that the Petitioner has referred to a civil Suit in O.S.No.649 of 1991, on the file of the District Munsif, Palani and also the decree passed thereunder and added further he has also made a reference in his affidavit in Writ Petition in Para 4 about A.S.No.28 of 2000, on the file of Sub Court, Palani, which was also dismissed, thereby the Judgment of the trial Court was confirmed. Now, it appears that the Second Appeal in S.A.No.1138 of 2004 was admitted by this Court and the same is pending as on date. 4. In view of the fact that the Petitioner has made a representation before the Respondent on 23.07.2014, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the Respondent/Tahsildar, Ottanchathiram Taluk Office, Ottanchathiram, to consider the said representation of the Petitioner, on merits, (of course after providing due opportunities to the Petitioner and others concerned, if any) within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.