Disposed¶41

D.Selvaraj v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC4 Sept 2025WP/14348/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ of certiorari (Article 226) against District Revenue Officer, Perambalur order dated 10.03.2015 (Na.Ka.A2/20338/12) allowing fifth respondent R.Selvam's patta-cancellation appeal over 28 cents in S.No.168/10, Veppanthattai; Madras High Court (M. Dhandapani, J.) held patta confers only possessory rights, not title; impugned order made subject to pending title suit O.S.No.40 of 2013 (District Munsif Court, Perambalur); liberty to succeeding party to seek patta transfer; writ petition disposed of, no costs; petitioner D.Selvaraj; decided 04.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with observations and directions: impugned order declared subject to the result of O.S.No.40 of 2013; succeeding party given liberty to apply to the appropriate authority for transfer of patta; no costs. ¶41

D.Selvaraj Vs The District Revenue Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶41

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 10.03.2015 of the first respondent allowing the fifth respondent's appeal (for cancellation of patta) is sustainable, and whether it should be quashed, when the fifth respondent's civil suit O.S.No.40 of 2013 for declaration of title and permanent injunction is pending.

¶32

Court's answer

Patta represents only possessory rights recognised by the revenue authorities and does not confer any title over the property.

¶39

Ratio / Principle

The impugned order of the first respondent dated 10.03.2015 is subject to the result of the suit in O.S.No.40 of 2013 pending before the District Munsif Court, Perambalur; liberty is granted to the succeeding party to file an application before the appropriate authority for transfer of patta.

¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (single Judge, M. Dhandapani, J., 04.09.2025), W.P.No.14348 of 2015: The petitioner, owner of 37 cents in Iyan S.No.168/10, Old S.No.869/10, Veppanthattai South Village (purchase under sale deed dated 03.11.2010, Doc.No.3463 of 2010), sought a writ of certiorari under Article 226 to quash the District Revenue Officer's order dated 10.03.2015 (Na.Ka.A2/20338/12) allowing the fifth respondent's appeal for cancellation of patta over 28 cents. The Court held that patta is only possessory rights recognised by the revenue authorities and confers no title; noting the fifth respondent's pending suit O.S.No.40 of 2013 (District Munsif Court, Perambalur) for declaration of title and permanent injunction, the Court disposed of the writ petition declaring the impugned order subject to the result of that suit, and granted the succeeding party liberty to apply to the appropriate authority for transfer of patta. No costs.

¶1

W.P.No.14348 of 2015

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 04.09.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.14348 of 2015

D.Selvaraj

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Revenue Officer, Perambalur District, Perambalur.

¶11

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Perambalur District, Perambalur.

¶12

3.The Thasildar,

¶13

Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶14

4.The Village Administrative Officer, Veppanthattai Village & Taluk, Perambalur District.

¶15

5.R.Selvam

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

Prayer:

¶18

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to

¶19

issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.A2/20338/12 dated 10.03.2015 and quash the same.

¶20

1/6

¶21

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶22

W.P.No.14348 of 2015

¶23

For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji For Respondents : Mr.T.M.Rajangam for R1 to R4 Government Advocate R5 – No Appearance

¶24

O R D E R

¶25

This writ petition has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of

¶26

Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order of the first respondent in Na.Ka.A2/20338/12 dated 10.03.2015 and quash the same.

¶27

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the property in Iyan S.No.168/10, Old S.No.869/10, Veppanthattai South Village, Veppanthattai Taluk, Perambalur District admeasuring 37 cents and he purchased the same

¶28

from one Chella Pillai vide registered sale deed dated 03.11.2010 in Doc.No.3463 of 2010 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Veppanthattai and patta, chitta, adangal also transferred in his name. Whileso, the fifth respondent filed an application before the third respondent on 04.02.2011 seeking to cancel patta in respect of 28 cents in S.No.168/10 and the third respondent dismissed the said application on 23.11.2011 stating that the predecessors of the petitioner's vendor are the owners of the property and patta stood in their name all along

¶29

2/6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

W.P.No.14348 of 2015

¶32

and challenging the same, the fifth respondent filed appeal before the second respondent and the second respondent vide order dated 20.11.2012, dismissed the appeal. Thereafter, the fifth respondent filed appeal before the first respondent and also filed a suit in O.S.No.40 of 2013 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Perambalur, for declaration of title and permanent injunction and the same is pending. Whileso, the first respondent passed the impugned order allowing the appeal filed by the fifth respondent. The learned counsel further submitted that when the civil suit filed by the fifth respondent is pending the impugned order passed by the first respondent is not sustainable one.

¶33

3.The learned Government Advocate submitted that patta is only possessory rights and it does not confer any title over the property and further submitted that since the civil suit filed by the fifth respondent for declaration of title and permanent injunction is pending, this Court may observe that the impugned order is subject to the result of the said suit and may grant liberty to the succeeding party to file application before the appropriate forum for transfer of patta.

¶34

3/6

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

W.P.No.14348 of 2015

¶37

4.Heard both sides and perused the materials available on

¶38

record.

¶39

5.As rightly submitted by the learned Government Advocate patta is only possessory rights which was recognized by the revenue authorities and it does not confer any title over the property. Further the civil suit filed by the fifth respondent for declaration of title and permanent injunction is pending.

¶40

6.In view of the above, the impugned order of the first respondent dated 10.03.2015 is subject to the result of the suit in O.S.No.40 of 2013 pending on the file of the District Munsif Court, Perambalur. Liberty is granted to the succeeding party to file application before the appropriate authority for transfer of patta.

¶41

7.With the above observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

04.09.2025

pri

4/6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶46

W.P.No.14348 of 2015