P. Kampuram v. The District Collector

ORDER This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.04.2026.

¶2Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, learned Government's counsel, takes notice on behalf of the respondents 1, 3 & 4 and Mr.Durai Gunasekaran, learned Government Advocate, takes notice on behalf of the respondents 2 & 5.

¶3By consent of the parties, the main petition is taken up for disposal in the stage of admission itself.

¶4The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in this case, the private respondents had filed a suit in OS.No.138 of 2020 and fraudulently obtained the judgment and decree dated 14.12.2024. Based on the said decree, the private respondents are trying to remove the physical possession of the petitioner. Aggrieved over the same, a suit in OS.No.512 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner, in which an application in IA.No.3 & 4 of 2025 was filed for stay of operation of the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 14.12.2024. The said application is now at the stage of issuing notice to the parties. Page4 of 8

¶5In the meantime, the decree obtained by the private respondents, dated

14.12.2024, was produced before the official respondents and the said official respondents are making attempt to alter the revenue records as per the said judgment and decree. To avoid the same, a representation was filed before the respondents, requesting them not to mutate the revenue records. However, the same was not at all considered by the respondents till date. Hence, this petition.

¶6In reply, the learned Government's counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in this case, the mutation of records has to be done only based on the judgment and decree dated 14.12.2024 passed in OS.No.138 of 2020.

¶7Further, he would submit that though a suit in OS.No.512 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner, no interim order was obtained till date. Unless and otherwise any interim order is passed for stay of operation of the aforesaid judgment and decree obtained by the private respondents, the process of altering the revenue records will not be ceased. Hence, he requests this Court to pass appropriate orders.

¶8Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents and also perused the entire materials available on records. Page5 of 8

¶9In the case on hand, according to the petitioner, based on the judgment and decree dated 14.12.2024 passed in OS.No.138 of 2020, the private respondents are trying to remove the physical possession of the petitioner and also the official respondents are making attempts to mutate the revenue records. Hence, a representation was filed requesting the respondents not to mutate the revenue records. However, the said representation was not at all considered by the respondent.

¶10Further, it was submitted by the petitioners that he had also filed a suit in OS.No.512 of 2025, wherein an application in IA.No.3 & 4 of 2025 was filed for stay of operation of the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 14.12.2024.

¶11However, as rightly contended by the official respondents, though a suit in OS.No,512 of 2025 was filed by the petitioner, no interim order was obtained till date. Unless and otherwise any interim order is passed for stay of operation of the decree obtained by the private respondents, the process of mutating the revenue records cannot be ceased. In such case, if the petitioner is aggrieved over the mutation of records, he can very well approach the concerned Civil Court to obtain appropriate interim order. If any interim order is obtained, certainly, the officials respondents shall act accordingly. Page6 of 8

¶12In future, if any favourable decree is obtained in the suit filed by the petitioner, the same may be presented before the respondents for subsequent mutation and therefore the interest of the petitioner will sufficiently protected once the favourable decree is obtained from the Civil Court.

¶13In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain this petition at this stage. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. No cost. 11-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order nsa To

¶1The District Collector District Collector office, Fort Main Road, Salem District 636 001

¶2The Superintendent of Police Near Anjaneyar Kovil, Nethimedu, Salem 636 002

¶3The Revenue Divisional officer near Attur Court, Vinayagapuram Post, Attur, Salem 636 102 Page7 of 8

¶4The Tahsildar Ranipet Main Road, Pungavadi Post, Attur Taluk, Attur, Salem 636 1022

¶5The Inspector of Police Attur Police station, Pungavadi Post, Attur Taluk, Attur, Salem 636 1022 WPoNo.o21752oofo2026 KRISHNANoRAMASAMYoJ. nsa WPoNo.o21752oofo2026 11-06-2026 Page8oofo8

Page1 of 8 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY P. Kampuram W/o periyasamy no 125 / A4E, Tanishka Greenway Apartment, VSM nagar, Therkku Kaadu, Vinayagapuram, Attur, Salem 636 103 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The District Collector District Collector office, Fort Main Road, Salem District 636 001 2. The Superintendent of Police Near Anjaneyar Kovil, Nethimedu, Salem 636 002 3. The Revenue Divisional officer near Attur Court, Vinayagapuram Post, Attur, Salem 636 102 4. The Tahsildar Ranipet Main Road, Pungavadi Post, Attur Taluk, Attur, Salem 636 1022 5. The Inspector of Police Attur Police station, Pungavadi Post, Attur Taluk, Attur, Salem 636 1022 6. R.Sasikala W/o Raja D. no 65/3 Ram nagar, Page2 of 8 Konerpatti, Rasipuram, namakakl 7. R. dhanasekaran S/o Ramasamy No 50/106 kandasamy kovil street, Tho. jotarpalayam, Rasipuram, namakakl 8. M. jeganathan S/o Muthugounder, nanchappagounder Thottam, Kattukottai, Mulluvadi, Attur Salem 9. Deepa W/o balamurugan, Residing at, Appamasamuthiram Village, Attur Taluk, Salem district 10.karthika W/o Racivhandran Residing at, Appamasamuthiram Village, Attur Taluk, Salem district ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners represetnation dated 02.04.2026 and consequently direct the competent authority to conduct enquiry and take necessary action in accordance with law For Petitioner(s): Mr.N.Vijayaraj For Respondent(s): Ms.Inthu Karunakaran, Govt's counsel for R1, 3 & 4 Mr.Durai Gunasekaran, GA for R2 & 5 Page3 of 8