WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 21.07.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 and WMP(MD)Nos.11691 and 11694 of 2026 Ramesh ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Tahsildar, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. 2. The Deputy Tahsildar, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. 3. Poomathi ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent in TR No. 2025/N103/22/019990TR dated 28.11.2025 and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioners : Mr. R.Prasanna For R1 & R2 : Mr.I. Pinaygash Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu For R3 : Mr.RMS.Sethuraman for M/s.KBS Law Office Page No.1 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 ORDER The present writ petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 28.11.2025. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without issuing notice to the petitioner and therefore, it is liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice. 3. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that a suit in O.S.No.264 of 2005 on the file of the District Munsif, Aranthangi, was filed by the petitioner's father against the 3rd respondent and one Mangudi/husband of the 3rd respondent, for the relief of permanent injunction in respect of the subject property. The said suit was dismissed, against which, the petitioner's father has preferred A.S.No.93 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Court, Pudukkottai. The appellate Court has remanded the case. After remand, the petitioner's father has let the suit for dismissed for default, against which, the petitioner's father has not filed any restoration petition. While that being so, the petitioner cannot seek any prayer before this Court. Page No.2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 4. The ground that is raised by the petitioner is that without issuing notice to him and hearing him, the impugned order directing transfer of patta in favour of the 3rd respondent, has been passed. Originally, patta in respect of the subject property stood in the name of the petitioner's grandfather Karuppaiah. On perusing the impugned order, it is seen that the 3rd respondent has submitted an application for transfer of patta on 13.11.2025 and the 2nd respondent has passed the impugned order on 28.11.2025. Absolutely, no notice was issued to the petitioner prior to passing of the impugned order. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 28.11.2025 has been passed by violating the principles of natural justice. Hence, on that ground alone, the impugned order is set aside. The matter is remitted back to the 2nd respondent who shall issue notice to the petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent and grant them personal hearing and thereafter consider the case and then pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Page No.3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 21.07.2026 Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No bala To 1. The Tahsildar, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. 2. The Deputy Tahsildar, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. Page No.4 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)No.15594 of 2026 S.SRIMATHY, J. bala ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.15594 of 2026 DATED : 21.07.2026 Page No.5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis