Madras High Court
A.Baskar vs The District Collector on 8 August, 2023
2023:MHC:3589
WP No.11765 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08-08-2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
WP No.11765 of 2021
A.Baskar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Nagapattinam.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
3.The Tahsildar,
Tahsildar Office,
Nagapattinam.
4.The Taluk Deputy Surveyor,
Land Survey Division,
Nagapattinam. ... Respondents
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to measure the
land of petitioner measuring 2007 ½ sq.ft., in Survey No.41/1B1,
Andanapettai Village, Nagapattinam Taluk and to issue patta to the
petitioner for said extent of 2007 ½ sq.ft., acquired under Registered Sale
Deed dated 22.04.1998, Document No.429/1998, District Registrar,
Nagapattinam.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Siva Subramanian
For Respondents : Mr.G.Krishna Raja,
Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondents to measure the land of petitioner measuring 2007 ½ sq.ft., in
Survey No.41/1B1, Andanapettai Village, Nagapattinam Taluk and to issue
patta to the petitioner for said extent of 2007 ½ sq.ft., acquired under
Registered Sale Deed dated 22.04.1998, Document No.429/1998, District
Registrar, Nagapattinam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
2. The issues raised in the present writ petition were
adjudicated by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in WP No.37519 of
2016 etc. batch [S.Sakkarai vs. The Tashildhar, Dharmapuri District]
and judgment was delivered on 19.06.2023 and the relevant paragraphs of
the said 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. 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
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 either in the patta
proceedings or in the proceedings under the
Survey and Boundaries Act are restricted and to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
similar to that of the cases (cited supra), the present writ petition is also to
be considered on the same line.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
08-08-2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-Speaking order
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
Svn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
To
1.The District Collector,
Collectorate,
Nagapattinam.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Nagapattinam.
3.The Tahsildar,
Tahsildar Office,
Nagapattinam.
4.The Taluk Deputy Surveyor,
Land Survey Division,
Nagapattinam.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.11765 of 2021
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn
WP 11765 of 2021
08-08-2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
