A patta is not a title document and does not confer ownership; registration requires valid title documents.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 29-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Mohana ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Sub Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Kinathukadavu, Coimbatore.

2. The Tahsildar O/o.Tahsildar, Madukarai Taluk, Coimbatore District.

..Respondent(s)

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1^st respondent to register the General Power of Attorney dated 12.02.2026 presented by the writ petitioner for registration which was kept pending as Document No. P/Kinathukadavu/183/2026 and release the document to the writ petitioner within the time frame to be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed to direct the 1^st respondent to register the General Power of Attorney, dated 12.02.2026, presented by the writ petitioner for registration which was kept pending as Document No.P/Kinathukadavu/183/2026 and release the document to the writ petitioner within a time frame.

2.The petitioner states that her husband Rajavel had 1/7th share in the lands measuring an extent of 117 sq.m. comprised in Survey No.1090/19; 869 sq.m. comprised in Survey No.1111/1; 124 sq.m. comprised in Survey No.1123/2 and 489 sq.m. comprised in Survey No.1130/17, totalling an extent of 1599 sq.m., situated at Chettipalayam Village, Madukarai Taluk, Coimbatore District. After the demise of her husband, the petitioner and her children inherited the 1/7th share of her husband and they are in joint possession and enjoyment of the property with the other shareholders. In order to deal with the 1/7th share in the property, the petitioner and her children entered into a Power of Attorney with one Sathish vide General Power of Attorney dated 12.02.2026 and presented the said document before the 1^st respondent for registration vide Document No.P/Kinathukadavu/183/2026. However, instead of registering the same, the 1^st respondent has sent a letter dated 17.02.2026 in Na.Ka.No.48/2026 to the 2^nd respondent seeking clarification as to the genuineness of the Patta No.375 presented by the petitioner along with the document. It is the grievance of the petitioner that, till date, the document has not been registered. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with this writ petition.

3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, though the petitioner is in possession of a valid patta issued by the 2^nd respondent, the 1^st respondent has arbitrarily sought for genuineness of the same, instead of registering the document presented before them. Hence, the learned counsel prays for appropriate orders.

4.Per contra, Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents, would submit that patta is not a document of title and unless the petitioner establishes her title based on title documents, the Power of Attorney presented by her cannot be registered. Hence, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner’s document is put on hold.

5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6.It is trite that patta is not a document conferring title. It is only a document to show the possessory rights of a person. Unless the petitioner establishes her title based on any title documents, no document can be registered merely based on patta. If at all the petitioner has any grievance, it is open to her to approach the competent Civil Court and establish her right in the manner known to law and thereafter, present the Power of Attorney before the 1^st respondent for registration. However, at this stage, the relief as sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted.

7.Accordingly,