High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking to quash a patta transfer to a temple deity. Relying on a civil court decree that negated the petitioners' title, the Court found no merit in granting relief to modify revenue records at this stage.
Writ petition dismissed as devoid of merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
W.P. No. 4732 of 2011
and W.M.P. No.2 of 2011
(P2 to P5 are substituted as legal representatives of deceased sole petitioner as per order dated 07.07.2020 made in WMP. Nos.16226 and 16227 of 2016 in W.P. No.4732 of 2011)
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent in passing the impugned order by issuing patta No.984 dated 19.02.2009 by transferring the patta No.395 stood in the petitioner's name to the name Arasadi Pillayar in respect of S.No.203 measuring 1.81 acres, situated at Perunkranai Village, Chitammur Post Cheyyur Taluk, Kanchipuram District and quash the same and direct the second respondent to restore the patta No.395 to the petitioner's name in respect of the above property.
For Petitioners : Mr. N.Nagu Sah
For Respondents : Mr. A.Madhumathi Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
This petition is filed for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned order by the second respondent transferring patta in the name of Arasadi Pillayar in respect of S.No.203, situated at Perunkaranai Village, Chitammur Post Cheyyur Taluk, Kanchipuram District and to direct the second respondent to restore patta No.395, to the petitioner's name in respect of the above property.
against the petitioners holding that the deceased petitioner or her mother had no title to the property as against the defendants in the suit who represented the temple and set up title in favour of the temple. Having regard to the Civil Court's decree rejecting the claim of petitioner, this Court is unable to find any error or irregularity in the patta granted in favour of the temple in preference to the petitioner. Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act clearly enables a person to seek modification of entries in revenue records in accordance with the declaration of the Civil Court regarding one's title. Since the petitioner's title has been negatived by the Civil Court, the petitioner cannot seek transfer of patta in favour of the petitioner. However, it is open to the petitioner to seek modification of revenue records or for grant of patta in favour of the petitioners in case the petitioners succeed in Second Appeal now pending before this Court in S.A. No. 879 of 2010.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct the restoration of a patta in petitioner's name despite a civil court decree negating their title to the property.
Whether there is any error in the revenue officer's decision to register patta in the name of the temple deity based on the civil court findings.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
K.Amirthammal (Deceased) and others
The Collector, Kancheepuram District
The Tahsildar, Cheyyur Taluk Office
S.S.SUNDAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
