S.AJAZ AHMED Vs. DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. M. Karthikeyan, learned Additional Government Pleader accepts notice for respondents 1, 2 and 4. Mr. M. Tamilarasan, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the third respondent. Heard both.

(2.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the first respondent herein exercising his revisional power while confirming the order passed by the second respondent rejecting the claim made by the petitioner for grant of separate patta in his favour.

(3.) On perusal of the order passed by the second respondent dated 06. 4. 2018, as confirmed by the first respondent dated 02. 5. 2019, it is evidently clear that there is a serious dispute as regards the title to the property. In fact, the first respondent had taken the trouble of passing a very detailed order for the purpose of establishing that unless and until the title to the property is established by the petitioner, a separate patta could not be granted in favour of the petitioner. The first respondent had rightly noted in his detailed order that when there is a dispute regarding title based on documents of possession, it is only for the civil court, which will have the jurisdiction and that if there is a cloud over the title, then the parties must be relegated to approach the civil court.