(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 22.09.2025 made in W.P.No.4131 of 2018.)

R. Suresh Kumar, J.

1. This intra-court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ court dated 22.09.2025 made in W.P.No.4131 of 2018.

2. The issue that was brought before the Writ Court relates to the land consisting of 95 cents at S.Nos.590 and 591 at Korattur Village, Chennai. It is the case of the appellant/writ petitioner that, it was purchased by the appellant by the registered sale deed dated 05.09.2005 from one M/s.Asha Nivas, Social Welfare Centre, pursuant to which, patta has been transferred to the appellant/writ petitioner's name. However, subsequently, in the year 2014, the appellant/writ petitioner came to know that the Trustees of the Impros Charitable Trust have filed a suit in O.S.No.45 of 2014 for appointment of Commissioner for sale of the lands in S.Nos.590 and 591, which belongs to the appellant/writ petitioner, where, the appellant/writ petitioner got impleaded. Subsequently, the suit has been withdrawn.

3. Be that as it may, however, the fifth respondent, namely one N.Satheesh, seems to have given a representation to cancel the patta which stood in the name of the appellant/writ petitioner pertaining to the land in question on the ground that the land belongs to him. The second respondent, that is the Revenue Divisional Officer, without conducting a proper enquiry, canceled the patta granted in favour of the appellant/writ petitioner.

4. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant/writ petitioner had already approached this Court by filing W.P.No.36797 of 2016, which was allowed by the Writ Court on 27.02.2017 on the ground that, no opportunity was granted to the appellant/writ petitioner while passing the order by the second respondent. Thereafter, further orders were passed on 19.04.2017, whereby, the fifth respondent's claim was rejected by the second respondent, namely the Revenue Divisional Officer.

5. Aggrieved over the order dated 19.04.2017, the fifth respondent filed a revision before the first respondent, who, by the order impugned before the Writ Court dated 14.02.2018, directed to cancel the patta that stood in the name of the appellant/writ petitioner and further directed to transfer the patta in the name of a Trust, namely “Sri Karapatra Siva Prakasa Swamigal Samathi Nilayam”. Aggrieved over the same, the said writ petition was filed.

6. It is recorded by the learned Writ Court that, on behalf of the writ petitioner, it was stated before the Writ Court that, without disposing the order that was impugned before the Writ Court, liberty may be granted to the writ petitioner to approach the Civil Court by filing appropriate civil suit to seek declaration of title over the property in question and having recorded the same, the learned Writ Court dismissed the said writ petition with the said liberty. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ appeal has been directed.

7. Heard Mr.P.L.Narayanan, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.M.G.Ramachandiran, learned counsel for respondent 5 and Mr.V.Ragavachari, learned Senior Counsel for respondent 6.

8. Now, it is a disputed question with regard to the title over the property in question, for which, solution could be made only by filing appropriate civil suit before the competent Civil Court. But, at the same time, insofar as the order impugned, passed by the first respondent dated 14.02.2018, directing to issue patta in the name of a third party, namely, “Sri Karapatra Siva Prakasa Swamigal Samathi Nilayam”, who was not at all a party to the present writ proceedings, is concerned, on what basis that order had been passed cannot be gone into at this stage, as there are several rival claimants before this Court with regard to the ownership of the property in question.

9. That issue could be only decided by the Civil Court, but, at the same time, if the order passed by the first respondent, which was impugned before the Writ Court, is permitted to act upon, that will unnecessarily create more complexion, thereby, if any third party right is further created, that will cause further prejudice to the parties here, including the appellant as well as the private respondents.

10. In that view of the matter, after hearing the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Official respondents, we are inclined to dispose of this writ petition with the following orders:-

                   (i) As has been directed by the learned Writ Court, let the appellant or any other parties, including respondents 5 and 6, could approach the Civil Court and file a civil suit seeking a declaration, where, whatever interim relief could also be sought by the parties.

                   (ii) Till a decision is taken by the competent Civil Court, in passing a decree and a judgment, or making any interim arrangements by way of passing interim orders in any interlocutory applications to be filed in this regard by the parties before the Civil Court, the order impugned before the Writ Court dated 14.02.2016, passed by the first respondent canceling the patta that stood in the name of the writ petitioner/appellant and granting patta in favour of the said Trust “Sri Karapatra Siva Prakasa Swamigal Samathi Nilayam”, on both accounts, shall be kept in abeyance.

                   (iii) This order shall not stand in the way of the parties to this lis, that is the appellant as well as the private respondents, to agitate the issue even before the Revenue Authorities, where, if they are advised to do so, they could independently seek issuance of patta in their names, if they are able to establish that they are entitled to get patta for whole or any part of the property in question.

11. With these directions, the writ appeal is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.Nos.5728 and 5729 of 2026 are closed.