S.Rajendran vs The District Revenue Officer
2023 Latest Caselaw 3225 Mad

                                                                        W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED : 27.03.2023

                                                        CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

                                              W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022
                                                      and
                                             W.M.P.(MD)No.696 of 2022


                     1. S.Rajendran
                     2. Logarani                                           ... Petitioners


                                                          Vs.


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

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

                     3. The Tahsildar,
                        Uthamapalayam,
                        Uthamapalayam,
                        Theni District.

                     4. Uthayasuriyan                                     ... Respondents


                     _________
                     Page 1 of 8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

                     PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                     praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to
                     the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.
                     24006/2016/T4, dated 12.10.2021 and quash the same.
                                   For Petitioners     :         Mr.K.Guhan

                                   For Respondents     :         Mr.N.Muthu Vijayan
                                                                 Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R3
                                                                 Mr.K.Surendran for R4

                                                       ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of Certiorari

seeking records relating to the impugned order passed by the first

respondent, District Revenue Officer, Theni District, in Na.Ka.No.

24006/2016/T4 dated 12.10.2021 and to quash the same.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, the

petitioners had stated that the lands in S.Nos.642/3 and 642/4 measuring

1.05.0 Hectares and 0.11.15 Hectares respectively situated at

Karunkattankulam, Uthamapalayam Taluk, Theni District, originally

belonged to Periyakaruppan, S/o.Muthumaya Thevar. It is stated that he had

no issue and he had no children. He had executed a gift settlement deed in

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

favour of the first petitioner / nephew on 28.08.1985. The first petitioner

claims that he is in enjoyment and possession of the property.

Periyakaruppan is said to have died in the year 1991. The first petitioner

then executed a gift settlement deed in favour of his wife, the second

petitioner Logarani. The settlement deeds are in dispute. A dispute is raised

by the fourth respondent. Both the petitioners and the fourth respondent

belong to one family, though not directly related but are agnates. The

property had not been divided by metes and bounds. Therefore, the fourth

respondent, questioned the execution of the gift settlement deed itself in

favour of the petitioners herein.

3. In view of the fact that the petitioners had obtained patta, the

fourth respondent had instituted proceedings for cancellation of patta. The

matter finally went before the second respondent / Revenue Divisional

Officer, Uthamapalayam, at Theni District.

4. The second respondent, by an order, dated 29.06.2006 in

Pa.Mu.No.2847/2015/A4 cancelled the patta granted in favour of the

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

petitioners herein. Challenging that particular order, the petitioners filed a

further revision before the first respondent, namely, District Revenue

Officer at Theni district. The order passed by the District Revenue Officer

dismissing that particular revision filed by the petitioners herein is put in

test before this Court.

5. Mr.K.Guhan, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that

there was a finding by the first respondent about the documents available by

the petitioners and the fourth respondent and about the patta. It is stated that

after giving that particular finding, however quite wrongly, the revision

petition was dismissed.

6. Finally, it had been stated that both the parties will necessarily

have to file a civil Suit for establishing title for determining possession and

thereafter, if both are found to have equal and valid title for division of the

property in metes and bounds. These are exercises which can be determined

and adjudicated only by the competent civil Court.

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

7. It is stated by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in

view of the order of the first respondent, the civil Court might give a finding

as against the petitioners herein. But let me make it very clear that every

civil Court should give its finding only on the basis of the evidence adduced

before the said Court, where the documents which are presented and are

subjected to cross-examination. The oral evidence can also be subjected to

cross-examination.

8. I am confident that no Civil Judge would render a finding

merely because of a particular finding given by the revenue authorities. The

civil Court would independently apply its mind to the facts of the case to the

pleadings and evidence and come to a conclusion.

9. After the civil Court renders its judgment, I give liberty to both

the petitioners and the fourth respondent to approach the first respondent

again in accordance with the judgment delivered by the civil Court with

respect of mutation of the name in the revenue records.

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

10. These are the issues which have to be examined only by the

civil Court in the first instance, and thereafter, the revenue authorities will

have to give a decision. The first respondent had correctly stated that it is

only appropriate that the parties must go before the civil Court to adjudicate

all issues. Either the petitioners or the fourth respondent must file a suit

before the competent jurisdictional civil Court to agitate their issues. This

Court cannot interfere with the order of the first respondent at the present

stage.

11. Since directions are given, though the order is not set aside,

the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Consequently, connected

Miscellaneous Petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

27.03.2023

NCC: Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No

vji

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

To

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

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

3. The Tahsildar, Uthamapalayam, Uthamapalayam, Theni District.

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

vji

W.P.(MD)No.865 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No.696 of 2022

27.03.2023

_________

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