Revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon disputed questions of title to immovable property or issue/cancel patta when a civil suit concerning the same property title is pending before a competent Civil Court.

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 05.03.2020, 12.09.2018 & 20.09.2018 passed by the respondents 2 to 4.

2. The petitioner owned agricultural property comprised in Survey Nos.94/12B, 94/13C, 94/13D, 94/14A & 95/5, situated at Pullagoundampatty Village, Sankari Taluk, Salem District. Originally, the properties were owned by his father and his brother one K.Raju and they were jointly cultivating the said lands. The said properties, along with other properties, were originally purchased by the petitioner’s grandfather along with his brothers in the year 1957. Thereafter, by way of partition deed dated 26.08.2013, the petitioner’s father and his paternal uncle partitioned the properties among themselves. While being so, the fifth respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.14 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sankari, as against the petitioner, his father and others, seeking a declaration in respect of the subject property, including the property comprised in Survey No.94/13C in his favour. The property comprised in Survey No.94/13C belonging to the petitioner’s father by virtue of the partition deed dated 26.08.2013 vide Document No.6148 of 2013. The said suit is now pending adjudication.

3. While being so, suppressing the pendency of the suit filed O.S.No.14 of 2014, the fifth respondent approached the third respondent by filing an application seeking issuance of patta in respect of the properties comprised in Survey Nos.94/1,2,3,4, 94/11B, 94/12A, 94/13A, 94/13B, 94/13C and 94/20. On receipt of the said application, the third respondent conducted a detailed enquiry by issuing summons to all the parties concerned. After conducting due enquiry, the third respondent, by order dated 12.09.2018, concluded that the petitioner and his father are the absolute owners of the subject properties. However, the fifth respondent did not prefer any appeal as against the said order. The fifth respondent, suppressing the above facts and circumstances, straight away filed an application before the fourth respondent seeking transfer of patta in respect of the subject properties. On the very same day, i.e., on the date of receipt of the application itself, the fourth respondent, without issuing any notice and without giving any opportunity of hearing, ordered to include the fifth respondent’s name in all the revenue records, including the patta. Aggrieved by some of the observations made by the third respondent while considering the application of the fifth respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal before the second respondent. However, the second respondent, without considering the above facts and circumstances, by order dated 05.03.2020, rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner and directed the parties to approach the Civil Court for appropriate relief.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is a title dispute between the parties and in view of the pendency of the civil suit, the revenue authorities have no jurisdiction to issue of patta in respect of the disputed land with regards to the title. In fact, the fifth respondent suppressed the fact that the third respondent had already rejected his earlier request seeking issuance of patta i