Revenue authorities lack jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the genuineness of a Will or determine title to property; such disputes regarding title and the validity of a Will must be resolved by a competent Civil Court through a declaratory suit.

For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Thanka Sivan For Respondent(s): Mr.D.Ravichandran Special Government Pleader for R1 to R5 Ms.K.Geethika for Mr.S.Manuraj for R6 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

This writ appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 03.07.2025 made in W.P.No.19787 of 2025.

2. The present appellant was the writ petitioner, whose grandfather, one Chockalingam Chettiar, was the original owner of the property in question. On 23.01.1956, he bequeathed a Will in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner, as he is the grandson of the said Chockalingam Chettiar. On 06.09.1956, the said Chockalingam Chettiar died. At that time, the appellant/writ petitioner was a minor. On his behalf, the property was looked after by his father, one Ramaswami, and he died on 14.02.1991. This is how it is claimed by the appellant/writ petitioner that the property had been devolved to the appellant/writ petitioner.

3. When that became so, originally, the patta stood in the name of the said Chockalingam Chettiar and subsequently, it has been transferred to the appellant/writ petitioner Ramanathan, therefore, he became the absolute owner of the property and patta has been issued in his name. On

31.05.2024, the appellant/writ petitioner settled the property in the name of his wife namely R.Valliammai. Pursuant to the subsequent settlement, patta has been transferred in the name of the said R.Valliammai, but, when the matter stood thus, the patta in the name of R.Valliammai has been cancelled by the fifth respondent Zonal Deputy Tahsildar through the order dated 29.03.2025. Challenging the said cancellation of patta, the appellant/writ petitioner filed the said writ petition in W.P.No.19787 of

2025.

4. Before the Writ Court, it was stated on behalf of the official respondents that, they would reconsider the matter after issuing notice to the writ petitioner as well as the sixth respondent and other interested parties. Recording the same, the matter was remitted back to the official respondents, that is the fifth respondent, for reconsideration.

5. In fact, not satisfied with the said order passed by the Writ Court dated 03.07.2025, since without setting aside the cancellation order dated 29.03.2025, the remand order was passed by the Writ Court, that was challenged in the writ appeal.

6.1. Today, when the writ appeal is taken up for admission, Mr.D.Ravichander, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, that is respondents 1 to 5, would submit that, pursuant to the order dated 03.07.2025, the Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, that is the fifth respondent, has acted upon and he had given notice to the appellant/writ petitioner as well as the sixth respondent and some other interested parties, who are third parties, and after hearing them, orders have been passed on 05.11.2025, thereby, it was directed that, the patta given in the name of the sixth respondent after cancelling the patta that stood in the name of the wife of the appellant/writ petitioner shall continue to be there till the Will, claimed to have been executed in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner, is proved by filing a suit by the appellant/writ petitioner before the competent Civil Court.

6.2. Relying upon this proceedings issued by the fifth respondent dated 05.11.2025, the learned Special Government Pleader would contend that, insofar as the claim made by the appellant/writ petitioner is concerned, only on the strength of the non-registered Will, said to have been executed