Court denies appeal, rules writ not valid for property title dispute. Petitioner can seek rights in proper forum.

The court rejected the petitioner's appeal and upheld the decision that a writ was not the appropriate remedy for the dispute over property title. However, the court modified the order to allow the petitioner to establish his rights in an appropriate forum through proper proceedings, aiming to protect the petitioner's interests without unfairly prejudicing the other party.

---

---

Issues involved: Dispute over land tax payment, ownership of property, issuance of possession certificate, appropriateness of writ remedy.

The petitioner requested the court to direct respondents 2 to 4 to accept the land tax paid for the property and change the Thandaper in his favor, along with seeking a possession certificate for the property. The respondents, in their counter affidavit, claimed that the State Government is the owner of the property due to a revenue sale. The learned Single Judge, noting the dispute over property title, ruled that a writ is not the appropriate remedy and directed the petitioner to establish his rights in a civil forum. The petitioner appealed this decision, arguing that he should not be required to prove his title in a civil suit.

The appellant contended that the learned Judge erred in directing him to establish his property rights through a civil suit. The court, while rejecting the appeal, modified the order to allow the petitioner to establish his rights in an appropriate forum through proper proceedings. This modification was made to safeguard the petitioner's interests without causing prejudice to the other party.

---