Individual patta cannot be issued for undivided ancestral land without partition and consent of all co-owners.

O R D E R

This Court suo-motu impleads as Periyakaruppan, S/o.Subbaiah, Sirathakudi Neivagal Panchayat, K.Pallivasal Post, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District and Subbaiah, S/o.Karupppaiah, Sirathakudi Neivagal Panchayat K.Pallivasal Post, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District. as

8^th and 9^th respondents.

2. This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the 2^nd Respondent to consider the Petitioner's Representation dated 28.04.2023 filed as against the alleged individual Patta No. 280 for the undivided ancestral properties issued for the land located in Survey Nos. 19/7B, 18/3-A2, 28/5A, 29/1, and 80/6A, situated at Seerathakudi Village, Thirumayam Taluk, Pudukkottai District, and cancel the same, and register it as per the Patta No.159 document as it stood before individual Patta No. 280, within the time stipulated by this Court..

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issuance of individual Patta No. 280 in the name of one Periyakaruppan is illegal, as it was done without notifying the petitioner. He further stated that the property in question is undivided and belongs to the petitioner's father, Dhanushkodi, and his brothers—Karuppaiya, Kasi, and Subbaiah—as co-owners. After the death of the petitioner's father, the petitioner, along with his uncles Karuppaiya, Kasi, and Subbaiah, were entitled to the property, and a joint patta (Patta No. 159) was issued. However, the said Subbaiah, the petitioner's uncle, executed a settlement deed in favor of his son, Periyakaruppan, without the knowledge or consent of the other co-owners. Despite the property being undivided, the said Subbaiah intended to sell it to a third party without clearly identifying his share. The settlement deed was executed with the intention of selling the property.

Aggrieved by these actions, the present petition has been filed.

4. Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 7.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the 2^nd respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation dated 28.04.2023 after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as the parties involved, namely Karuppaiya, Kasi, Subbaiah, and their respective legal heirs. An enquiry should be conducted, and pass appropriate orders within four months from the date of receipt of this order.

6. It is clarified that if the parties are unable to identify and partition the suit property, the undivided share cannot be sold without the consent of the petitioner. The said Subbaiah and his son are directed not to encumber the property until the present enquiry is disposed of by the 2^nd respondent. It is also emphasized that an individual patta cannot be issued without the property being partitioned. Further the respondents 8 and 9, though necessary parties to this writ petition, have not been impleaded by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs. 1000 (Rupees One Thousand only) as cost to the Creche attached to the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court.

7. With these directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of .