1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN W.P.(MD).No.2944 of 2011 R.Pandiarajan : Petitioner Vs 1. The District Collector, Madurai District,Madurai. 2. The President, Karuppayurani Panchayat, Madurai. 3. The Village Administrative Officer, 103, Kalikappan 2nd bit, Madurai North Circle, Madurai. 4. Regional Deputy Tahsildar, Othakkadai Region, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai. 5. C.Venkatesan 6.C.Ranjith Selvakumar : Respondents (R5 & R6 Impleaded as party respondents vide Court order dated 9.4.2011 in MP.1/2011) PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to issue the property tax receipt by accepting petitioner's the payment for issuance of the property tax receipt in respect of the survey No. 134, 18 and 18 (part) situated in Kalikappan Village, Karuppayurani, Madurai, in view of his representation dated 02.03.2011. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Siddharathan For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government Advocate For RR 5 & 6 : Mr.P.Natarajan O R D E R The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a Mandamus directing the second respondent to issue the property tax receipt by accepting petitioner's the payment for issuance of the property tax receipt in respect of the survey No. 134, 18 and 18 (part) situated in Kalikappan Village, Karuppayurani, Madurai, in view of his representation dated 02.03.2011. 2. The petitioner claims title to the property under settlement deed, dated 24.11.2010 and on that basis, he claims that the property tax register should be changed in his name. 3. Whereas the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 5 and 6 came with an application to implead themselves as a party as they are the owners of the property and that application was allowed. He would contend that they are the owners of the property by virtue of sale deed, dated 09.01.2007. He would further contend that it is purely a civil dispute, the petitioner has to agitate his grievance only before the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Civil Court, without doing so, he has come forward with the Writ of Mandamus and therefore, the Writ Petition at this stage is not maintainable and it can only be decided in the Civil Court. 4. Heard both parties. 5. The learned Government Advocate would also state that it is purely a civil dispute between the parties and the title has to be declared only by the Civil Court. 6. Taking into consideration, this is only a Mandamus seeking to consider the name transfer in the register, whereas there is a dispute in respect of the very title itself between the petitioner and the respondents 5 & 6. As the matter is purely pertains to civil dispute, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the Civil Court to get necessary relief. 7. With the above said observation, this Writ Petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to establish his right before the Civil Court alone. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P&A) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Collector, Madurai District,Madurai. 2. The President, Karuppayurani Panchayat, Madurai. 3. The Village Administrative Officer, 103, Kalikappan 2nd bit, Madurai North Circle, Madurai. 4. The Regional Deputy Tahsildar, Othakkadai Region, Madurai North Taluk, Madurai. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.20666 +1CC TO MR.P.NATARAJAN, ADVOCATE SR.20227 vsg SR : 05.07.2011 : 2p/7c W.P.(MD).No.2944 of 2011 27.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/