The High Court can cancel registrations of fraudulent documents while reaffirming jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, but declaring documents null and void falls to civil courts.

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Mandamus directing the 4^th respondent to transfer the patta in favour of the petitioner in respect of the property, measuring to an extent of 0.38 cents, comprised in Survey No. 2/6B , 0.43 cents in Survey No. 7/2 and 0.26 cents in Survey No. 7/3A total extent of 1 acre 7 cents situated at Athamananchery village, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District after considering the petitioner's representations dated 31.01.2024 and 28.06.2024.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that initially, the aforesaid property was purchased by one L.Srinivasulu Reddy from one Susila Ammal and her Legal Heirs by virtue of a Sale Deed dated 27.10.1980. Thereafter, the said subject property was purchased by the petitioner from the said Srinivasulu Reddy vide Sale Deed dated 17.08.1988.

3. Further, he would submit that since the patta pertaining to the aforesaid property stands in the name of the 8^th respondent-Temple, the petitioner made representations dated 31.01.2024 and 28.06.2024 to the respondents 1 to 4 seeking for transfer of patta in favour of the petitioner. Since, no action has been taken till date, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.

4. In reply, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 5 to 8, on instructions would submit that, originally, the property belongs to one Susila Ammal and her minor legal heirs. The said Susila Ammal sold her property as well as the property of minor legal heirs to and in favour of Arulmigu Venugopalswamy Temple, represented by its Temporary Dharmakartha, Mr.Srinivasulu Reddy, by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 27.10.1980, but, the petitioner has wrongly interpreted the same as if his vendor, Mr.L.Srinivasulu Reddy, has purchased the said property in his personal capacity.

5. That apart, by referring the sale deed dated 27.10.1980, he would submit that the name of L.Srinivasulu Reddy had appeared in the purchaser column of the revenue records only as he was the 'Temporary Dharmakartha'

(Trustee) of the temple.

6. Further, he would submit that there is no dispute with regard to the ownership of the subject property till the execution of the aforesaid Sale Deed dated 27.10.1980. Only after the purchase of the said property by the petitioner, the dispute with regard to the ownership arose. Therefore, it is submitted that since the property belongs to the temple, the respondents are not in a position to issue patta in the name of the petitioner. He therefore, prays for the dismissal of this writ petition.

7. Heard both sides and perused the records.

8. In the case on hand, the subject property was purchased by the petitioner from one Mr.L.Srinivasulu Reddy vide Sale Deed dated 17.08.1988. Since the patta pertaining to the aforesaid property stands in the name of the 8^th respondent-Temple, the petitioner made representations dated 31.01.2024 and 28.06.2024 to the respondents 1 to 4 seeking for transfer of patta in favour of the petitioner. However, the said representations were not considered by the respondents till date.

9. According to the respondents, initially, the subject property was sold, by one Susila Ammal and her legal heirs, by virtue of the Sale Deed dated 27.10.1980, to and in favour of the 8^th respondent, viz., Arulmigu Venugopalaswamy Temple, represented by one Mr.L.Srinivasulu Reddy (Temporary Dharmakartha). Hence, it was contended that the subject property belongs to the 8^th respondent-Temple and the same was not purchased by one L.Srinivasalu Reddy in his individual capacity. That apart, due to a mere mentioning of the name of Srinivasulu Reddy in the purchaser's column of the revenue records, it cannot be inferred that he is the absolute owner of the subject property.

9. On