Madras High Court
Mr. M. Muthukumaraswamy ... vs The Tashildar on 21 August, 2023
2023:MHC:3898
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 21.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
Mr. M. Muthukumaraswamy Mudalliar ...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Tashildar,
Kundrathur Main Road,
Subramaniyan Nagar,
Thandalam – 600069.
2.The Land Surveyor,
Office of Tasildar,
Kundrathur Main Road,
Subramaniyan Nagar,
Thandalam – 600069. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the
petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2021 to measure and survey the
properties mentioned in the affidavit by fixing boundary stones.
For Petitioner : Mr. S. Muralikrishnan
for Mr.V.K. Ajith Kumar
For Respondents : Mr. G. Krishna Raja,
Additional Government Pleader.
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.09.2021 to
measure the petitioner's property comprised in Survey No.360/1&2, 361, 362,
364 situated at Kundrathur Taluk, Mangadu Village, Kancheepuram District.
2. The issues raised in the present writ petition were adjudicated by this
Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.37519 of 2016 [S.Sakkarai Vs.
The Tashildhar, Dharmapuri District] etc., and batch, and a judgment was
delivered on 19.06.2023 and the relevant paragraphs of the judgment are
extracted hereunder:
“36. Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure
unambiguously contemplates that “The Courts shall
have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature
excepting suits of which their cognizance is either
expressly or impliedly barred.
37. Therefore, a special enactment has no
relevance with reference to a right of the parties to
approach the competent Civil Court of law to resolve
all nature of civil disputes including boundary dispute,
survey dispute, title dispute, ownership or otherwise.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
Therefore, neither the parties nor the authorities need
to create an impression that in the event of boundary
dispute, the parties have to approach the authorities at
the first instance. It is not required that the aggrieved
persons, in the event of boundary dispute has to
approach the authorities for fixing the boundary, they
are at liberty to approach the Civil Court of law under
Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which is
unambiguous in this regard.
38. Submitting an application for fixing
boundary is an option available to the aggrieved
persons. Once an application is filed, whether the
application is entertainable under the provisions of the
Act is to be determined by the authorities and only if it
is falling within the ambit of the Act, then alone the
survey or fixing of boundary is to be undertaken. Even
in this case, the authorities are bound to relegate the
parties to the competent Civil Court of law under
Section 14 of the Act.
39. It is contended by the petitioner that the
authorities are making certain findings regarding the
title, ownership in their order, while rejecting the
applications. Such findings made by the authorities
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
either in the patta proceedings or in the proceedings
under the Survey and Boundaries Act are restricted
and to be understood only for the purpose of arriving a
conclusion under the provisions of the Act and the said
patta proceedings or the proceedings under the Survey
and Boundaries Act would not confer any title or be
taken as a conclusive decision, more specifically under
Section 35 of the Evidence Act.
40. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to
consider the representations / applications submitted
by the petitioners in the order of seniority and by
following the procedures as contemplated under the
Governmental orders and in consonance with the
provisions of the Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 and
pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance
with law. Wherever the applications are already
disposed of and appeals provided under the Act has
been filed, then such appeals are to be decided on
merits and in consonance with the provisions of the
Survey and Boundaries Act.”
3. In view of the fact that the case of the petitioner is also similar to
that of the cases (cited supra), the case of the petitioner is also to be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
considered on the same line.
4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
21.08.2023
veda/hvk
Index:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
To
1.The Tashildar,
Kundrathur Main Road,
Subramaniyan Nagar,
Thandalam – 600069.
2.The Land Surveyor,
Office of Tahsildar,
Kundrathur Main Road,
Subramaniyan Nagar,
Thandalam – 600069.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
veda/hvk
W.P.No.24450 of 2023
21.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
