JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Certiorarified Writ of Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.14411/2019/J1 dated 16.11.2021 confirming the order of the 2nd respondent in Ni.Mu.1790/2019/A dated 19.09.2019 and quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to remove the illegal entries made in the Patta Nos.1292 and 1842.)

The order passed by the 1st respondent / District Revenue Officer in the proceedings dated 16.11.2021, rejecting the revision petition filed by the petitioner is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner states that he is the absolute owner of the subject property, more fully described in the writ proceedings. The petitioner is in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the subject property and applied for patta. Subsequently, patta has also been granted in his favour in Patta Nos.1292 and 1842.

3. The contesting respondents 4 to 7 filed an application to cancel the patta and the authorities competent, without considering the documents, had included the names of the respondents 4 to 7 in the patta.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that insertion in the patta was made without issuing notice to the petitioner and thus, the very action per se is in violation of the principles of the natural justice. Challenging the said insertion made by the original authority, the petitioner has filed a revision petition before the District Revenue Officer, who in turn rejected the same and thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

5. It is not in dispute between the parties that a Civil Suit was instituted and more specifically the Suit filed by the respondents 4 to 7 was dismissed and subsequently, they have preferred an Appeal Suit, which is yet to be numbered.

6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner made a submission that the Appeal Suit is pending at the stage of condonation of delay in representing the appeal papers.

7. May that as it be, an appeal has already been instituted. Whether it is going to be rejected or will be numbered need not be considered in the present writ proceedings. Once an Appeal Suit has been instituted by anyone of the parties, it is to be construed that the issues are sub-judiced. Under these circumstances, either of the parties shall be allowed to take undue advantage of the revenue proceedings. The issue regarding the dispute on hand has been considered by this Court in the case of D. Srinivasan -vs- The District Collector, Thiruvallur reported in CDJ 2017 MHC 8536 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted below:-

“3. This Court is of the view that granting of patta, cancellation of patta or alteration of revenue records has to be undertaken by the competent authority only if the parties have settled the dispute in relation to the title of the immovable property through civil Court. When the civil suit is pending before the competent Civil Court, the Revenue Authorities need not take any decision in respect of granting or cancellation of patta or changes in any other revenue records. In this regard, it is relevant to consider the provision of The Tamilnadu Patta Pass book Act, 1983, herein after called as ''The Act''

Section 3 of the said Act states that :-

“The Tahsildar shall issue a patta pass book to every owner in respect of land owned by him, on an application made by him in this behalf. Any application received under this section shall be acknowledged by the Tahsildar or any other officer authorised by him in this behalf.”

Section 4 deals with Presumption of correctness of entries in the patta pass book:-

“The entries in the patta pass book and the certified copy of entries in the patta pass book shall be presumed to be true and correct, until the contrary is proved or a new entry is lawfully s