Mohammed Muzhammil v. 4.The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram District.5.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.6.The Tahsildar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Inul Fathima ... Respondents1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1858 of 2025 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 2 to 6 not to harass and not to interfere…
Judgment
W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1858 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 29.10.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHANW.P.Crl. (MD).No.1858 of 2025andW.M.P.Crl. (MD).No.441 of 2025 Mohammed Muzhammil ... Petitioner Vs.
The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District.
The Inspector of Police, Valinokkam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
The Inspector of Police, Sikkal Police Station, Ramanathapuram District.
The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
Operative part
Inul Fathima ... Respondents1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1858 of 2025 Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 2 to 6 not to harass and not to interfere the suit schedule property (S.No.138/1Y2A and S.No.138/1Y3A, Vallinokkam Village, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District) in O.S.No.142 of 2024 on the file of Additional District Court, Paramakudi. For Petitioner: Mr.S.A.AjmalkhanFor R-1 to R-3: Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public ProsecutorFor R-4 to R-6: Mr.D.S.Nedunchezhian, Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents 2 to 6 not to harass him and not to interfere with the suit schedule property (S.No.138/1Y2A and S.No.138/1Y3A, Vallinokkam Village, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District) in O.S.No.142 of 2024 on the file of the Additional District Court, Paramakudi. 2. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that an enquiry was conducted on the complaint given by the seventh respondent and the same was closed; and that the petitioner would not be called for enquiry.2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1858 of 20253. Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.29.10.2025NCC : Yes / NoIndex : Yes / NoInternet : Yes/ NoLm To1.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District. 2. The Inspector of Police, Valinokkam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. 3. The Inspector of Police, Sikkal Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. 4. The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram District. 5. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District. 6. The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. 7. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.1858 of 2025SUNDER MOHAN, J.LmW.P.Crl. (MD).No.1858 of 202529.10.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Recording the above submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.