Grant of patta by Govt.does not bar jurisdiction of Civil Court.

C.R.P.No.401 of 1995 is directed against the order dated 110. 1984 made in E.P. No.68 of 1983 in O.S.No.lOO of 1951 on the file of the District Munsif, Devakottai.

C.R.P. No.402 of 1995 is directed against the order passed in E.P. No.159 of 1982 in O.S. No.101 of 1951 on the file of District Munsif Devakottai.

2. The petitioners in the court below are eight Karai Vallambara Community of Ariyakadi, Idayur and Vettiyur villages on whose behalf O.S. Nos.100 and 101 of 1951 were filed in a representative capacity.

3. O.S.No.100 of 1951 was filed by one (1) S.Andiappan and (2) S.P.Palaniappan as representatives of Eight Karai Vallambars of Ariyakudi, Idayoor and Vettiryur village under the provisions of O.1, Rule 8, C.P.C. against some leading Udayars and Ariyakudi Sri Thiruvengadamudayan Devasthanam. The suit O.S.No.100 of 1951 was for recovery of possession of four items of properties, viz:

(1)3 acres 70 cents being a portion of T.S .No.507;

.(2) 4 acres and 55 cents of land in T.S.No.510 and T.S.No.238.

.(3) 1 acre 50 cents out of 12 acre 60 cents in T.S.No.491;

.(4) 6 acres land east of Railway line.

In O.S. No.101 of 1951 the suit is for recovery of possession of five items of properties;

viz;

.(1) 2 acres 14 cents of Punja in T.S.No.515;

.(2) 2 acres 29 cents of Punja in T.S.No.521;

.(3) 2 acres 16 cents in T.S.No.522;

.(4) 1 acre 70 cents in T.S.No.523;

.(5) 66 cents in T.S.No.524;

In O.S. No.100 of 1951 the trial court, after taking elaborate evidence, decreed the suit on 38. 1963 in respect of items 1,2, and 3 and dismissed the suit in respect of 6 acres of land on the east of railway line. The appeal in A.S.No.308 of 1963 filed by the defendants and the cross-objections filed by the plaintiff in respect of 6 acres of land were dismissed by the District Court, Madurai, Aggrieved, the defendants filed S.A.No.593 of 1977 before the High Court.

4. In O.S.No.101 of 1951 the trial court, after elabo- rate evidence, decreed the suit in respect of item 3, viz; T.S.No.522 and dismissed the suit in respect of items 1,2,4 and 5. The plaintiffs filed A.S.No.303 of 1963 and the defendant filed A.S.No.305 of 1963 in support of their respective claims before the District Court, Madurai. The plaintiff’s appeal A.S.No.303 of 1963 was partly allowed, viz., decree passed with respect to item No. 1, viz. T.S.No.515 and item 5, viz., T.S.No.524. The defendant’s appeal A.S.No.305 of 1963 was dismissed. Thus pursuant to the appellate Court’s judgment, the plaintiffs hold a valid decree in respect of three items as against five items claimed in the suit. The three items are: (1) T.S.No.515, (2) T.S.No.522 and (3) T.S.No.524. The first defendant, aggrieved by the first appellate Court’s judgment, approached the High Court in S.A.No.594 of 1977. The High Court, while disposing of the second appeals S.A. Nos.593 and 594 of 1977, in its common judgment dated 112. 1980 held as under:

“Accordingly, the second appeals are allowed insofar as they relate to that portion of the building and site which is comprised in T.S. No.507/ 4 in respect of which S.Arulandu Udayar was gives a ryotwari patta under Ex.B-23 as also in respect of T.S. Nos.510 and 522/3 for which a 11(a) patta was granted in favour of Arulandu Udayar. In other respects, the second appeals are dismissed.”

5. Based on the decree of the High Court in S.A. No.593 of 1977 the decree-holders filed E.P. No.68 of 1983. The decree-holders have specifically excluded the properties covered in T.S. Nos.507/4 and 510 in terms of the decree passed by the High Court in S.A. No.593 of 1977 and E.P. No.68 of 1983 is confined only to the other items.

6. Based on the decree of this Court in S.A. No.594 of 1977, the decree-holders filed E.P. No.159 of 1982. The decree-holders have specifically excluded the properties covered in T.S.No.522/3 in terms of the High Court’s decree in S.A. No.594 of 1977 and E.P. No.159 of 1982 is confined only to the other items.

7. In the abovesaid Ex