Madras HC Quashes Patta Grant To Rival Claimant, Saying Revenue Officer Could Not Decide Title After Civil Court Refused His Declaration

The fourth respondent had sued the petitioner seeking declaration of title, mandatory injunction and recovery of possession. The suit was dismissed on 23 November 2022, and the fourth respondent’s appeal was later dismissed as not pressed on 29 January 2025.

The petitioner challenged the Tahsildar’s order dated 8 May 2025, which cancelled the patta standing in the name of the petitioner’s predecessor and directed issuance of patta to the fourth respondent, after finding that he had substantiated his title.

The fourth respondent objected that the petitioner had an available appeal remedy.

In patta proceedings, revenue authorities should not adjudicate a genuine dispute over title; the parties must seek resolution before the competent civil court.

A revenue authority cannot record a conclusive title finding that runs contrary to a competent civil court’s judgment, as doing so would amount to sitting in appeal over that court’s decision.

The judgment cites no specific statute or precedent for these principles.

The Tahsildar’s order acknowledged that the fourth respondent’s appeal arose from a civil court judgment refusing a declaration of title, and that the fourth respondent had undertaken to withdraw the appeal.

Nevertheless, the Tahsildar found that the fourth respondent had proved title and granted him patta. The High Court held that this exceeded the authority’s role in patta proceedings and conflicted with the civil court’s judgment; the title dispute therefore had to be resolved by the civil court, not the revenue authority.

It allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 8 May 2025, made no order as to costs, and closed the connected miscellaneous petition.