W.P.No.15722 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.06.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR W.P.No.15722 of 2025 Vs. 1. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Vepery, Chennai-600 007. 2.The Executive Engineer Zone V, Greater Chennai Corporation. Respondent(s) 1/5 1. Rita Jacqulin 2.J.Benny Stephen 3.Minor J.Eunice Becky Represented by her mother and natural guardian Mrs.Rita Jacqulin. Petitioners https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.15722 of 2025 Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned Name Transfer Notice bearing No.9/24-25/1073126 dated 07.03.2025 passed by the 1st respondent in the name transfer application No.3189 preferred by the petitioners and to quash the same and to consequently direct the 1st respondent. For Petitioners : Mr.A.Harikrishnan For Respondents : Mr.S.Gopinathan ORDER The petitioners are before this Court challenging the name transfer notice dated 07.03.2025 issued by the first respondent. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, instead of mutating the name of the first petitioner in the property tax register, the names of her husband and mother-in-law have been entered. The subject property is a residential house bearing Door No.60 (Old No.4), Vedagiri Maistry Street, Chintadripet, Chennai – 600 002, comprised in R.S. No.143/3, measuring an extent of 1 ground and 834 sq. ft. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.15722 of 2025 3. The records disclose that the property was originally purchased by the first petitioner’s father-in-law, who subsequently settled the property in favour of his son by executing a registered settlement deed. Thereafter, the first petitioner’s husband, by a registered settlement deed, settled the property in favour of the first petitioner. Pursuant thereto, the first petitioner submitted an application seeking mutation of her name in the property tax register. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. 5. The records reveal that the property presently stands in the name of the first petitioner by virtue of the registered settlement deed executed by her husband. It is also not in dispute that the first petitioner’s husband has no objection to the mutation of her name in the property tax register. However, without considering the said registered settlement deed and other relevant records, the first respondent issued the impugned name transfer notice. The impugned action is, therefore, arbitrary and unsustainable in law. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.15722 of 2025 6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The impugned name transfer notice dated 07.03.2025 issued by the first respondent is hereby quashed. The first respondent is directed to mutate the name of the first petitioner in the property tax register in respect of the subject property within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. 30.06.2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No dna To 1. The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation, Rippon Building, Vepery, Chennai-600 007. 2.The Executive Engineer Zone V, Greater Chennai Corporation. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.15722 of 2025 HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR.J., dna W.P.No.15722 of 2025 (1/2) 30.06.2026 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis