Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 not for intricate title disputes; approach Civil Court.

ORDER

The prayer in the Writ Petition is for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to entertain or accord any legal recognition to the alleged fraudulent release deed bearing Document No. 3334 of 2008, registered in the office of the third respondent/Sub- Registrar, in respect of the land measuring 2 acres and 58 cents comprised in Survey No.108/2A and 3 acres comprised in Survey No.108/3, situated at Kusavapatti Village, Madurai District, based on the petitioner’s representation dated 13.01.2026.

2. On a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it is the case of the petitioner that his grandfather was assigned the above said lands under the Adi Dravidar Welfare Scheme in the year 1986, and patta was also issued in his name. After the demise of the petitioner’s grandfather on 01.04.2000, he was survived by his four children, namely, P.Subramaniam (the petitioner’s father), Pichayammal, P.Chellamuthu and Vasantha Devi. Subsequently, the patta was transferred in the names of Pichayammal and Vasantha Devi, though, according to the petitioner, the properties belonged only to P.Subramaniam [the petitioner's father]

and P.Chellamuthu [the brother of the petitioner's father].

3. It is further the case of the petitioner that the female legal heirs had married and were residing in their matrimonial homes even prior to the enactment of the Hindu Succession (Tamil Nadu Amendment) Act, 1989. It is stated that an application was made by P.Subramaniam and P.Chellamuthu seeking cancellation of the patta standing in the names of the daughters, and the patta was thereafter transferred in the names of the male legal heirs alone. Subsequently, an oral partition is said to have taken place between P.Subramaniam and P.Chellamuthu. It is thereafter that one S.Ravichelvan, son of Pichayammal, is stated to have executed the release deed bearing Document No.3334 of 2008. According to the petitioner, the said document is illegal, arbitrary and fraudulent.

4. A perusal of the averments made in the affidavit would show that the dispute raised by the petitioner involves intricate questions relating to title. Such issues cannot be adjudicated in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, nor can they be decided by the registering authority.

5. Accordingly, finding no merits, the Writ Petition stands disposed of, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for appropriate relief, if so advised. No costs.