Dismissed

Subburaj v. District Revenue Officer

Madras HC5 Mar 2021WP(MD)/4593/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a revenue order rejecting his revision petition via writ seeking restoration of patta. Held settlement of lis and factual disputes between rival claimants is beyond writ jurisdiction; petitioner must approach civil court. Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as not maintainable; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

Subburaj Vs District Revenue Officer — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.4593 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.03.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.(MD)No.4593 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD)No.3681 of 2021

¶3

Subburaj : Petitioner Vs.

¶4

1.The District Revenue Officer, Theni District, Theni.

¶5

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District, Theni. 3.The Tahsildar, Periyakulam Taluk, Periyakulam, Theni District. 4.Ravi Kumar : Respondents

¶6

PRAYER :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire record pertaining to the impugned order in Proceedings Na.Ka.No.41522/2016/D4 dated 11.01.2021 passed by the first respondent and to quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the first respondents to restore the Patta No.1983 issued as per the RTR No.146/11-A by the proceedings of the third respondent within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶7

For Petitioner :Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan For R1 to R3 :Mr.M.Karuppasamy Government Advocate

¶8

ORDER

¶9

The petitioner claims himself as the absolute owner of the properties in S.No.207/3 (measuring an extent of 0.78.5 Hectares) and S.Nos.119/2, 119/1, 119/1A and 129/2 (measuring an extent of 8.13 acres) in E.Puthukottai (Endapuli), Periyagulam Taluk, Theni District, by virtue of registered sale deeds, dated 02.07.2010 and 13.06.2013 and the same was also confirmed by way of judgment and decree in A.S.No.24 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Court, Theni, dated 10.07.2013.

¶10

2.According to him, since the date of purchase, the petitioner has been in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the entire lands. Over for a period of time, it is stated in the affidavit that several transactions have been taken in regard to the subject https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

1/2

¶12

W.P.(MD)No.4593 of 2021

¶13

properties and proceedings have also taken place under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Patta Pass Book Act. The affidavit contains plethora facts, which are in fact, mind boggling and despite reading of the facts pertaining to several transactions in relation to the subject properties, ultimately, the prayer in the Writ Petition is to challenge the proceedings of the first respondent herein, dated 11.01.2021 rejecting the revision petition filed by the petitioner.

¶14

3.The proper course for the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case is to approach the Civil Court and assail the orders of the revenue authority and not before this Court in a writ jurisdiction. It is needless to mention that in cases where settlement of lis qua parties involving investigation of facts, it is not within the jurisdiction of this Court to enter into the factual realm and sort out the controversies as between the parties. This Court cannot undertake adjudication of various factual disputes qua parties and render any findings. It is for the Civil Court to consider the rival claims of the parties and as far as the petitioner is concerned, he has to work out his remedy before a Civil forum and not before this Court.

¶15

4.For the aforesaid reasons, this Writ Petition is dismissed as not maintainable and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/-

// True Copy //

1.The District Revenue Officer, Theni District, Theni.

¶20

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam,Theni District, Theni.

¶21

3.The Tahsildar,

¶22

Periyakulam Taluk,Periyakulam, Theni District.

¶23

+1 CC to M/s.P.M.VISHNUVARTHANAN, Advocate ( SR-9412[F] dated 08/03/2021 )

¶24

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-9474[F] dated 08/03/2021 )

¶25

SRK(CO)

¶26

KB(25.03.2021) 2P 6C

¶27

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶28

2/2

Subburaj v. District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subburaj v. District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manikandan.P Vs The Managing Director

Jharsanya Logistics Pvt., Ltd., Vs the Branch Manager

Chinnamuthiah.S Vs the Thasildar

Alagu Srinivasan.v Vs the Sub Divisional Magistrate Cum Sub Collector

Velmurugan Vs the Dist Collector

Jeyabalan.S Vs the Prl.Secretary and Commissioner