Madras High Court
Arumuga Pandi vs The Assistant Director For Survey on 4 March, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.3860 of 2021
Arumuga Pandi : Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Assistant Director for Survey,
District Surveyor Office,
Tenkasi.
2.The Surveyor,
Surveyor Office,
Alankulam Taluk Office, Tenkasi District.
3.Chelladurai Pandian. : Respondents
PRAYER :- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking
a Writ of Mandamus, to forebear the second respondent from surveying the land
in S.No.411/2 to an extent of 1 acre and 64 cents at Kavalakurichi Village,
Thenkasi District till the disposal of the S.A.(MD)No.1056 of 2009 pending on
the file of this Court.
For Petitioner :Mrs.S.Vijayashanthi
For R1 and R2 :Mr.C.Ramesh
Special Government Pleader
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/6
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
ORDER
The property in S.No.411/2 to an extent of 1 acre 64 cents at
Kavalakurichi Village, Tenkasi District was a joint family property purchased in
the name of Arumugathevar, petitioner's paternal uncle. Later, by way of an oral
partition of the joint family property, Arumugathevar had given a letter of
undertaking relinquishing his right and gave consent to transfer patta in favour
of petitioner's father, Shanmugathevar and his cousin brothers, namely,
Seenipandi and Chellapandi,. The patta was, therefore, transferred in the name
of the petitioner's father, Shanmugathevar and property was in joint possession
by the other persons of the family.
2.It appears that the said Arumugathevar filed a suit in O.S.No.431 of
2003 seeking declaration of title and injunction based on the sale deed executed
in his favour. The trial Court has decreed the suit on 04.06.2004 by granting the
relief of declaration and injunction. Subsequently, on 15.12.2005, the trial
Court decree was also confirmed in A.S.No.85 of 2005. As against the first
appellate Court judgment, a second appeal in S.A.(MD)No.1056 of 2009 was
filed before this Court and the same is pending as on date.
3.According to the petitioner, pending the second appeal before this
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
Court, the said Arumugathevar sold a portion of the said property to one
Irulappa Pandi on 25.01.2010. The said Irulappa Pandi, in turn, sold the
property conveyed to him to the third respondent on 09.07.2010. The
petitioner's father, in the meanwhile, filed an impleading petition in the pending
second appeal and notice was ordered by this Court. In the meanwhile,
Arumugathevar appears to have died and that his legal heirs were sought to be
brought on record.
4.It appears that the third respondent has also filed Crl.O.P..(MD)No.
12420 of 2020 before this Court seeking police protection and this Court has
also vide order, dated 05.11.2020 directed to provide police protection, if
necessary. Taking advantage of the order passed in his favour, the third
respondent is attempting to dispossess the petitioner from the property.
5.The petitioner, on his part, also appears to have approached this Court
in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.133 of 2021 seeking direction restraining the police from
interfering with the civil dispute with the subject matter of the property pending
in the second appeal before this Court. The said petition was disposed on
19.01.2021 recording the facts of pendency of the second appal and other
related issues and directed the parties to resolve the issue amicably before the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
competent Civil Court.
6.While the matter stood thus, according to the petitioner, on 26.02.2021,
the second respondent with the help of the police officials visited the subject
property for the purpose of surveying the land, notwithstanding the pendency of
the second appeal before this Court. In order to prevent the officials from
interfering with the civil dispute, the petitioner is before this Court seeking
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus restraining the second respondent from
carrying out the survey of the subject property.
7.From the factual narrative above, it could be seen that ultimately, the
dispute, as between the petitioner and the private respondent, is to be settled by
this Court in the pending second appeal in S.A.(MD)No.1056 of 2009. In fact,
from the averments, it could be seen that the parties have been repeatedly
approaching this Court on the criminal side and obtained directions on the civil
lis between the petitioner and the third respondent. However, the actual lis is
required to be settled only by this Court in the pending second appeal and
therefore, unless and until, the second appeal is disposed of finally, no parties
could upset the status-quo in the matter.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
8.In the above said circumstances, if this Court entertains this Writ
Petition at the instance of the petitioner herein and passes any directions, that
would unnecessarily precipitate the issue and complicate the lis further and also
it could not be proper for this Court to pass any direction in a Writ jurisdiction,
when a civil dispute is pending in the second appeal before this Court. Any
intervention by a Writ Court in the pending civil dispute on the file of this Court
in the second appeal stage would be grossly improper and would not be in the
fitness of things, as judicial discipline has to be maintained in such matters.
9.Therefore, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as not maintainable. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index : Yes/No 04.03.2021
cmr
To
1.The Assistant Director for Survey,
District Surveyor Office,
Tenkasi.
2.The Surveyor,
Surveyor Office,
Alankulam Taluk Office, Tenkasi District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
V.PARTHIBAN, J.
cmr
W.P.(MD)No.4747 of 2021
04.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
