Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, B. Ganesan, a senior citizen aged about 74 years, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents (District Collector, Revenue Divisional Officer, and Tahsildar of Sivagangai District) to issue patta in respect of land bearing S.F.No.197/9, extent 0.64.0 ares, situated in Vannikudi Revenue Village, Kalayarkoil Taluk, Sivagangai District, in his name. The petitioner had earlier challenged an order dated 20.11.2009 cancelling the assignment of the land by filing a civil suit O.S.No.190 of 2010, in which an ex parte decree and judgment were passed in his favour in 2011. The respondents did not take any steps to set aside the ex parte decree, which therefore attained finality. Despite the decree, the respondents failed to issue patta, prompting the petitioner to submit a representation dated 23.12.2024, which remained unconsidered. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner was made to run from pillar to post despite the civil court decree in his favour. The respondents' counsel, the Additional Government Pleader, submitted that the respondents came to know of the ex parte decree only after the petitioner's representation and thus could not take steps to set it aside earlier. The court, after hearing both sides, held that since the ex parte decree had not been set aside and had attained finality, the respondents were bound to consider the petitioner's representation. The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 and pass orders on merits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Direction to Consider Representation - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to issue patta based on a civil court decree. The court, noting that the ex parte decree had not been set aside and had attained finality, directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 and pass orders within six weeks, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. (Paras 1-6)
B) Civil Procedure - Ex parte Decree - Finality - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order IX Rule 13 - The court observed that the ex parte decree passed in O.S.No.190 of 2010 in favour of the petitioner had not been challenged by the respondents and thus attained finality. The respondents' belated knowledge of the decree did not affect its binding nature. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents can be directed to issue patta in favour of the petitioner based on an ex parte civil court decree that has attained finality, and whether the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 should be considered.
Final Decision
The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 and pass orders on merits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus
- Civil Court decree binding on revenue authorities
- Ex parte decree not set aside attains finality
- Senior citizen's right to expeditious consideration
Case Details
Ms.S.Anitha Lakshmi, Mr.A.Kannan
1.The District Collector, District Collectorate, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. 2.The Revenue Divisional officer, Revenue Divisional Office, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District. 3.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Kalayar Koil Taluk, Sivagangai District.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to issue patta in favour of the petitioner.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner seeks direction to respondents to issue patta in respect of S.F.No.197/9, extent 0.64.0 ares, situated in Vannikudi Revenue Village, Kalayarkoil Taluk, Sivagangai District, and to consider his representation dated 23.12.2024.
Filing Reason
The petitioner obtained an ex parte decree in O.S.No.190 of 2010 setting aside the cancellation of assignment, but the respondents failed to issue patta despite the decree attaining finality.
Previous Decisions
An ex parte decree and judgment was passed in favour of the petitioner in O.S.No.190 of 2010 in the year 2011, which was not set aside by the respondents.
Issues
Whether the respondents can be directed to issue patta based on an ex parte civil court decree that has attained finality.
Whether the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 should be considered by the respondents.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that the ex parte decree in O.S.No.190 of 2010 was passed in favour of the petitioner and the respondents did not take steps to set it aside, hence it attained finality. The petitioner, a senior citizen, is made to run from pillar to post for grant of patta despite the decree.
Respondents' counsel (Additional Government Pleader) submitted that the respondents came to know of the ex parte decree only after the petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 and therefore could not take steps to set it aside earlier.
Ratio Decidendi
An ex parte civil court decree that has not been set aside attains finality and is binding on revenue authorities. The respondents are bound to consider the petitioner's representation for issuance of patta based on such decree, and a writ of mandamus can be issued to direct consideration of the representation.
Judgment Excerpts
The Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to issue patta in respect of S.F.No.197/9...
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that the order cancelling the assignment, dated 20.11.2009 by the second respondent was challenged in O.S.No.190 of 2010. In the said suit, an exparte decree and judgment was passed in favour of the Petitioner.
The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents states that as on date no steps have been taken to set aside the exparte decree.
I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.
In view of the above, this Court directs the respondents to consider the Petitioner's representation dated 23.12.2024 and pass orders on merits within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed O.S.No.190 of 2010 challenging the order cancelling assignment dated 20.11.2009, and an ex parte decree was passed in his favour in 2011. The respondents did not set aside the decree. The petitioner submitted a representation on 23.12.2024 for issuance of patta, which was not considered, leading to the filing of W.P(MD)No.1595 of 2025 on an unspecified date. The writ petition was disposed of on 24.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
