SENNIYAPPAN Vs. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR PALLADAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Chief Justice: this writ appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 4. 7. 2003.

(2.) THE writ petitioner/appellant had challenged grant of patta to the third respondent. It is well settled that entries in the revenue records do not create or extinguish title nor have they any presumptive value vide M. T. W. Tenzing Namgyal and Ors. v. Motilal Lakhotia and Ors. , JT 2003 (5) SC 173, Balwant Singh v. Daulat Singh, (1997)7 SCC 137 and Smt. Sawarni v. Smt. Inder Kaur and others, 1996 (7) JT S. C. 580. Such entries are only for the purpose of payment of land revenue. The above Supreme Court decisions have been followed by us in the case of M. E. A. Mohamed Ali and others v. The District Revenue Officer, Ramanathapuram and others in W. A. No. 546 of 2005 by order dated 16. 3. 2005. In view of the same there is no merit in the writ appeal and it is dismissed. No costs.