1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 25.11.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)NO.13462 of 2011 Mrs.Pandiammal ... Petitioner Versus 1.The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. 2.V.Shanmugam 3.M.Karmegam ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.P4/4723/2011 dated 01.10.2011 and quash the same and directing the 1st respondent to conduct an fresh enquiry for the same and issue a patta in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the decree passed in O.S.No.3 of 1997 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Mudukulathur. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Kumaravel For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagathevan, Special Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition challenging an order passed by the Tahsildar, granting patta in favour of the rival parties and rejecting the application of the petitioner for the grant of patta. 2. Heard Mr.K.Kumaravel, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr.M.Alagathevan, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. 3. The petitioner appears to have filed a suit in O.S.No.3 of 1997 on the file of District Munsif Court, Mudukulathur, impleading the respondents 2 and 3 herein, seeking a declaration of title and permanent injunction. The suit was decreed on 23.11.2005. 4. But, it appears that the respondents 2 and 3 filed another suit in O.S.No.28 of 2004 and secured a decree in their favour. On the basis of that decree, the impugned order has been passed. Therefore, the appropriate course of action open to the petitioner is only to go before the Civil Court, which passed the second decree and get it set aside on the basis of his own decree. So long as, the decree passed in favour of the respondents 2 and 3 stands, the revenue officials will be facing a piquant situation, as what should be done. That embarrassment, could be avoided only by the petitioner getting the second decree set aside. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the Civil Court, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( Records ) /TRUE COPY/ vsm SUB ASST REGISTRAR To:: The Tahsildar, Kadaladi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District. 1CC TO MR. K. KUMARAVEL, ADVOCATE, SR: 41755: 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 41638: DM::2011:DECEMBER:09:: W.P.(MD)NO.13462 of 2011 1P:4C:: 25.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/