against legal heirs of Ayyammal and Devathal and on this ground alone, the above writ petition is liable to be dismissed. I submit that if at all the 1st respondent is claiming exclusive rights over the properties, the correct forum for him to agitate his rights and to declare his title is only a civil court and this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot decide the disputed questions of fact and the civil rights of the parties as claimed by the 1st respondent cannot be adjudicated in the above writ petition. The revenue authorities have merely ordered for the issuance of joint patta on the basis of prima facie materials and they have rejected the claim of the 1st respondent herein only based on the fact that he did not produce any materials to substantiate his claim over the properties. That apart, by virtue of a portion of the property already being sold in favour of P.Pandian about which 1s respondent is above aware and has also filed a suit challenging the sale deed, the said Pandian is also a necessary party in the above writ petition since his rights over the property is also involved."
