V.Amarathara vs The District Revenue Officer

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 14895 Mad
Judgement Date : 6 September, 2022

Madras High Court
V.Amarathara vs The District Revenue Officer on 6 September, 2022
                                                                                 W.P.No.27181 of 2016



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 06.09.2022

                                                     CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

                                               W.P.No.27181 of 2016
                                                       and
                                      W.M.P.Nos.23336 of 2016 & 38014 of 2017


                V.Amarathara                                              ... Petitioner

                                                        Vs


                1.The District Revenue Officer,
                  Vellore, Vellore District.

                2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
                  Ranipet, Vellore District.

                3.The Thasildar,
                  Arakkonam, Vellore District.

                4.R.S.Mani                                               ... Respondents


                Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the first
                respondent in his proceedings Pa.Mo.D3/29898/2013 dated 01.07.2016 and
                quash the same.



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                1/6
                                                                                W.P.No.27181 of 2016




                                  For Petitioner        : Mr.D.Jeremiah

                                  For Respondents       :
                                  For R1 to R3          : Mrs.M.Jayanthy
                                                          Additional Government Pleader

                                  For R4                : Mr.R.Bharanidharan


                                                     ORDER

The petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 01.07.2016 passed by the first respondent/District Revenue Officer cancelling the Patta issued to the petitioner pursuant to a Sale Deed dated 11.02.1993 executed in favour of the petitioner by Rajagopala Naidu's Legal Heirs.

2. The case of the petitioner is that though the Sale Deed dated 11.02.1993 is confined to only 1.45 Acres of land in S.Nos.19/3, 28/1 and 31 in Ananthapuram Village, Arakkonam Taluk, Vellore District, the petitioner is in actual possession of the entire extent of land measuring an extent of 5.21 Acres.

3. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent opposes the prayer in this Writ Petition stating that the petitioner had filed O.S.No.13 of 2015 only for permanent injunction. By Judgment and Decree dated 14.12.2021, the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/6 W.P.No.27181 of 2016 aforesaid suit was dismissed by the District Munsif Court, Arakkonam, Vellore District. It is submitted that though the petitioner has filed Appeal Suit in A.S.No.7 of 2022 before the Sub Court, Arakkonam, Vellore District, the petitioner cannot claim Patta over the land for which, the petitioner's father had a right and after the petitioner's father, the petitioner.

4. It is submitted that there was a partition between the family persons of Rajagopala Naidu and that the Sale Deed executed in favour of the petitioner is confined only to 1.25 Acres of land and that the Patta was wrongly issued though the Patta originally stood jointly in the name of both the brothers namely Ramakrishnan Naidu the father of the fourth respondent and Rajagopal Naidu.

5. The further case of the petitioner that the petitioner has perfected the title by way of adverse possession cannot be countenanced. It is submitted that the petitioner should have filed a suit for adverse possession in terms of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ravinder Kaur Grewal and others Vs Manjit Kaur and others, in C.A.No.7764 of 2014 dated 07.08.2019. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/6 W.P.No.27181 of 2016

6. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the first to third respondents and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent.

7. The issue relating to title cannot be decided by the respondents. It is for the Trial Court or the Appellate Court to decide as to whether the petitioner has perfected the title or not. If a wrong entry has been made in the Patta in the revenue records while issuing the Patta, it can be corrected at any point of time.

8. Considering the fact that the petitioner has filed A.S.No.7 of 2022, this Writ Petition is closed for the present leaving the petitioner to perfect her title over the property allegedly in her possession pending in A.S.No.7 of 2022 before the Sub Court, Arakkonam, Vellore District. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

06.09.2022 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking Order arb https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 W.P.No.27181 of 2016 To

1.The District Revenue Officer, Vellore, Vellore District.

2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ranipet, Vellore District.

3.The Thasildar, Arakkonam, Vellore District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 W.P.No.27181 of 2016 C.SARAVANAN, J.

arb W.P.No.27181 of 2016 and W.M.P.Nos.23336 of 2016 & 38014 of 2017 06.09.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/6