Madras High Court
P.Paramasivam vs Dhanalakshmi on 5 October, 2021
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 05.10.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN
C.R.P. (PD) No. 1375 of 2021
and
C.M.P. No. 10689 of 2021
P.Paramasivam ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Dhanalakshmi
2. Ragupathy
3. Kalaiselvi ... Respondents
PRAYERs: Civil Revision petitions filed under Article 227 of
Constitution of India to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed in I.A.
No. 4 of 2021 in O.S. No. 231 of 2017 dated 23.03.2021 on the file of the
Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode.
For Petitioner : Mr. M.S.Palaniswamy
ORDER
C.R.P. No.1375 of 2021 has been filed against the order passed in
I.A.No.4 of 2021 in O.S.No.231 of 2017 by the Principal District Munsif,
Tiruchengode, dated 23.03.2021.
2.Learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the suit in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
O.S.No.231 of 2017 was filed by the Petitioner seeking the relief of
permanent injunction interdicting and restraining the defendants, their
men, servants from in any way interfering with the petitioner's peaceful
usage and enjoyment of suit cart track to reach their lands.
3.The petitioner has taken steps for measuring the properties
comprised in Survey Nos. 348/2 and 348/3. In this regard, he has paid
necessary fees through Challan. But the respondents objected to measure
the same. Hence, the Tahsildar vide letter dated 27.07.2017 in
Na.Ka.No.7809-2017/A7 prayed for police protection to measure the
properties in respect of Survey Nos. 348/2 and 348/3. The respondents
through an advocate sent a legal notice informing not to measure the suit
properties. If the properties in Survey Nos. 348/2 and 348/3 are
measured, controversy between the parties can be resolved. However,
due to obstructive attitude of the respondents, the properties could not be
measured through the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode.
4.To bring to the notice of this Court, the efforts taken by the
petitioner for measuring the properties comprised in Survey Nos. 348/2
and 348/3, Petition was filed under Order XVI Rule 1(3) of the CPC, to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
summon the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode to appear before the Court along
with the petition dated 13.03.2017, challan for payment of Rs.320/-,
letter of the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode in Na.ka. No.7809-2017/A7 dated
27.07.2017 to the Inspector of Police, Elachipalayam Police Station and
notice of Mr.Ragupathy, dated 27.07.2017 sent to the the Tahsildar,
Tiruchengode and to give evidence. This petition came to be dismissed
by the learned Judge, Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode.
Against the order of dismissal made in I.A.No. 4 of 2021, the present
civil revision petition is preferred.
5.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the nature of
the suit and the relief claimed, to resolve the issue between the parties
and to establish the right of the petitioner in respect of the suit properties,
the petitioner has taken efforts to measure the properties comprised in
Survey Nos. 348/2 and 348/3. Since that was objected by the
Respondents, the measurements could not be taken place. However, it is
necessary to cross examine the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode in detail with
regard to the property and with regard to the extent of Survey No.348/2.
Therefore, he prays for setting aside the order passed by the learned
Judge, Principal District Munsif Court, Tiruchengode.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
6.It is seen from the records that notice was sent to the
Respondents and the same was served on the Respondents. Even though
the names of the Respondents were printed in the cause list, no one
entered appearance for the Respondents.
7. Scope of this civil revision petition is very limited to the extent
that admittedly, there is a dispute between the parties with regard to the
properties comprised in Survey Nos. 348/2 and 348/3. As per the
petitioner's case, the suit cart track is in survey No.348/3. The claim of
the petitioner about his right over the cart track is denied and disputed by
the respondents. Therefore, it has to be ascertained by measuring
these properties, to find out the availability of the cart track in
survey No. 348/3. The petitioner had made an attempt to measure these
properties with the help of the Tahsildar by paying necessary fess
through challan. It appears that the same was objected by the
respondents. The petitioner wants to summon the connected documents
to be produced before the Court through the Tahsildar, Tiruchengode
to show his bonafide and his efforts taken for measuring
the properties in respect of Survey Nos. 348 / 2 and 348 / 3
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
for resolving the issues. This Petition was dismissed on the ground that
the Petitioner ought to have applied for certified copies. These
documents have come into existence during the administrative
functioning of the Tahsildar. Therefore, we cannot expect the Tahsildar,
Tiruchengode to issue certified copies of these documents. These
documents have not come into existence during any judicial or quasi
judicial proceedings. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the
petitioner should be given an opportunity to summon the Tahsildar for
production of the documents and for giving evidence.
8.In this view of the matter, the order dated 23.03.2021 in I.A.No.4
of 2021 in O.S.No.231 of 2017 of the court below is set aside and
I.A.No.4 of 2021 in O.S.No.231 of 2017 is allowed.
9.Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is allowed. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
05.10.2021
Maya
Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
CRP. No. 1375 of 2021
G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J.
Maya
To
The Judge,
Principal District Munsif,
Tiruchengode
C.R.P. (PD) No. 1375 of 2021
and
C.M.P. No. 10689 of 2021
Dated: 05.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
