Kerala High Court
K.M.Natarajan vs Thahasildar on 4 August, 2021
WP(C) NO. 15635 OF 2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15635 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
K.M.NATARAJAN,
AGED 70 YEARS,
S/O MANI,KALAPPURAKKAL HOUSE,
RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.8/458 OF THRISSUR CORPORATION
,VILVATTAM VILLAGE,THRISSUR TALUK CHEROOR DESOM,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680008.
BY ADVS.
K.R.ARUN KRISHNAN
DEEPA K.RADHAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THAHASILDAR,
THRISSUR THALUK, THALUK OFFICE,
THRISSUR-680020.
2 THE TALUK SURVEYOR,
THALUK OFFICE, CHEMBOOKKAVU, THRISSUR-680020.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
VILVATTAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680631.
4 K.M.SIVADAS, AGED 69 YEARS,S/O.K.M.MANI, KALAPPURAKKAL
HOUSE, CHEROOR DESOM,
VILVATTAM VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT-
680008.
SMT K AMMINIKUTTY, SR GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 15635 OF 2021 2
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated by the 2nd respondent
herein, to fix the boundary of the property in Survey No.75/102 of
Vilavattam village, the petitioner has approached this Court with this writ
petition.
2. According to the petitioner, O.S.No.3709/2019 has been
instituted before the Munsiff Court, Thrissur, by the 4th respondent
herein seeking fixation of boundary as well as for injunction. The
petitioner, his wife and children are the defendants in the said suit. The
petitioner has entered appearance and has filed his written statement and
has raised a counterclaim. During the pendency of the suit, the 4th
respondent suppressing all aspects, approached this Court and filed W.P.
(C) No. 24141/2020 seeking expeditious disposal of an application filed
under Rule 43 of the Survey and Boundaries Rules, 1964 ('the Rules', for
short). The petitioner herein was not made a party to the proceeding.
According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent ought to have approached
the civil court itself instead of approaching this Court with the above writ
petition. He contends that when notice was served on him, he
approached the Additional Tahsildar and has filed Ext.P7 representation.
His grievance is that the said respondent would proceed to measure out
the property without heeding to the objections raised by the petitioner. It
is in the afore circumstances that this writ petition is filed seeking
directions to the respondents 1 to 3 not to carry out any
demarcation/fixation of the property mentioned in Ext.P6 in view of Ext.P1
suit pending between the petitioner and the 4th respondent and for
incidental reliefs.
3. Sri. K.R. Arun Krishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that the suit was instituted by the 4th respondent for
fixation of boundary and for incidental reliefs. It is contended that the
petitioner herein has lodged a counterclaim setting up of the title of his
own and sought for recovery of the possession of the very same property.
According to the learned counsel, in view of the pendency of the suit, the
carrying out of the demarcation of the property at this stage was uncalled
for.
4. The learned Government Pleader points out that pursuant to
Ext.P5 judgment passed by this Court Ext.P6 notice has been issued under
Form No.12. Referring to Ext.P6, it is pointed out that the petitioner herein
as well as his wife has been served with notice they being the nearby
property owners.
5. Faced with the said submission, the learned counsel submits that
he has filed Ext.P7 objection before the Additional Tahsildar, who is
conferred with the powers of Tahsildar (LR) and the same is pending. It is
also submitted that though the survey authorities had come to the
property on 22.07.2021, the measurements have not been carried out.
6. I have considered the submissions advanced.
7. In view of Ext.P6 notice issued under Form No.12, the petitioner
cannot be said to be aggrieved. Even according to the petitioner, the
dispute is with regard to the property covered under Ext.P1. Both the
petitioner as well as the 4th respondent have raised claims over the said
property. I am of the considered opinion that if the property is measured
out as directed by this Court in Ext.P5, it would go a long way in solving
the controversy and the same can be used by the parties in the civil
proceedings as well. In that view of the matter, there will be a direction to
the Tahsildar (LR), to whom directions have been issued in Ext.P5, to
consider the grievance, if any, raised by the petitioner herein while
finalising the proceedings on the basis of Ext.P5 judgment.
This writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
JUDGE
NS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15635/2021
PETITIONER (S) EXHIBITS :
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.S.NO.3709/2019 ON THE
FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT,THRISSUR DATED
21/12/2019 FILED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS
AGAINST THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY
THE PETITIONER,HIS WIFE ,SON ALONG WITH
THE WRITTEN STATEMENT IN O.S.NO.3709/2019
ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT,THRISSUR.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.20521/2019 IN
O.S.NO.3709/2019 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF
COURT,THRISSUR DATED 21/12/2019 FILED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT AS AGAINST THE
PETITIONER AND OTHERS.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED IN
I.A.NO.20521/2019 IN O.S.NO.3709/2019 ON
THE FILES OF MUNSIFF COURT, THRISSUR
DATED 14/07/2021.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 10/11/2020 OF
THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.
(C)NO.24141/2020.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 19/07/2021 GIVEN
BY THE PETITIONER TO ADDITIONAL
THAHASILDAR, DEPARTMENT OF THALUK
SURVEYOR, THRISSUR.
RESPONDENT (S) EXHIBITS : NIL
