Madras High Court
A.Amirtharaj vs The District Collector on 4 October, 2023
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 04.10.2023
Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P.No.9990 of 2022
and
W.M.P.Nos.9695 of 2002 and 9552 of 2023
---
A.Amirtharaj .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Collector,
Chennai District,
Singaravelar Maligai, Chennai-1.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
Central Chennai Division,
Chennai District,
Anna Nagar West Extension,
Chennai-600 101.
3. The Thasildhar,
Mambalam Division,
Chennai-600 078.
4. A.Jayapandian
5. A.Veerapandian
6. J.Andrews
7. V.Alben .. Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying
for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records
Page No.1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
pertaining to the impugned proceedings initiated by the second respondent in
Na.Ka.En.3439/2021/m3, dated 23.11.2021 and also order passed by the third
respondent in Na.Ka.No.099/m1/2022, dated 25.03.2022 and quash the same as
illegal and without jurisdiction.
For petitioner : Mr.S.Packiaraj
For respondents : Mrs.N.Senthil Selvi, Government Advocate
for RR-1 to 3
Mr.M.Velmurugan for RR-4 to 7
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the Writ Petition challenging the proceedings of
the second respondent in Na.Ka.En.3439/2021/m3, dated 23.11.2021 and order
passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.099/m1/2022 dated 25.03.2022, and
prayed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus and to call for the records
pertaining to the impugned orders and quash the same.
2. The writ petitioner submits that he had obtained a Decree in the
Original Suit in O.S.No.12804 of 2010 (since transferred from Madras High Court
in C.S.No.545 of 2006) on the file of the IV Additional Judge, City Civil Court,
Chennai. In the said suit, the petitioner herein, as plaintiff, had obtained a
decree on 26.08.2021 declaring him as absolute owner of all the piece and
Page No.2/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
parcel of the property bearing Door No.53, Andiappa Naicken Street, West
Mambalam, Kodambakkam Village, Chennai, comprised in Survey No.201,
T.S.No.17, Block No.64, ad-measuring 5543 Sq.Ft. and also that the defendants
or their agents are restrained by way of consequential permanent injunction
from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said suit
schedule mentioned property of the plaintiff.
3. As seen above, the petitioner (plaintiff) had obtained the said judgment
and decree in O.S.No.12804 of 2010, but still, the surveyor has re-agitated the
issue and seeks summons for measuring the property in question once again.
Hence, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition for the relief stated
above.
4. It is the main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that,
even though the petitioner had obtained the said Decree in his favour in the said
suit, now the Surveyor is re-agitating the issue, thereby it has led to filing of the
FIR under Section 145 Cr.P.C., in FIR.No.563 of 2021 on 01.11.2021 at the
instance of one Vivekanandan.
5. Heard the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1
Page No.3/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
to 3 on the above facts.
6. Learned counsel appearing for the private respondents 4 to 7, while
reiterating the facts by filing counter affidavit, submitted that survey numbers in
T.S.Nos.15 and 16 relate to the property of the petitioner, whereas T.S.No.17
was acquired for forming a Road and it is now stated that the Road work is also
over and hence, T.S.No.17 is not existing as on date.
7. It is further contended by the learned counsel appearing for private
respondents that the writ petitioner has trespassed into the property under
dispute, which belongs to the private respondents and hence, one
Vivekanandan has made a complaint before the jurisdictional Police, leading to
the registration of the FIR (supra) and that there is an apprehension that law
and order problem might be created, and therefore, in order to give quietus to
the issue in respect of measuring the property in dispute, the private
respondents 4 to 7 had approached the surveyor and they have also sent notice
to the writ petitioner herein.
8. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
Page No.4/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
9. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in respect of the impugned
proceedings initiated by the second respondent and also the order passed by the
third respondent, stated supra.
10. Though already the writ petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.12804 of
2010 (supra), and obtained a Decree therein, before the City Civil Court, but
from the records, it is seen that even the private respondents 4 to 7 had also
filed a civil suit in O.S.No.323 of 2001 for declaration and injunction in respect of
the property in question therein,and the same is pending.
11. Thus, when once the private respondents herein had approached the
Civil Court and also filed the said suit, it is open for them to work out their
remedy before the Civil Court in accordance with law, and they are precluded
from approaching the Police/Revenue Authorities.
12. In the above circumstances, as the private respondents themselves
have stated that T.S.No.17 is only a 'Road' and the property in question does not
even relate to T.S.No.17, there is no necessary for the concerned authority to
issue summons to the writ petitioner or the owners/necessary parties, or owner
Page No.5/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
of any one of the boundaries in relation to the subject matter, i.e. to measure
the property of the writ petitioner.
13. Therefore, in the above stated facts and circumstances, the impugned
orders passed by the respective respondents, are quashed. However, the private
respondents 4 to 7 has claimed that in respect of T.S.Nos.15 and 16, they have
already approached the Civil Court in O.S.No.323 of 2001, and hence, the parties
to this Writ Petition are at liberty to work out their remedy in the above said Civil
Suit in O.S.No.323 of 2001 in accordance with law and also on the merits of the
matter.
14. The Writ Petition is allowed as prayed for. There shall be no order as
to costs. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions are closed.
04.10.2023
Index: Yes/no
Speaking Order: Yes/no
Neutral Citation: Yes/no
cs
Page No.6/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
To
1. The District Collector,
Chennai District,
Singaravelar Maligai, Chennai-1.
2. The District Revenue Officer,
Central Chennai Division,
Chennai District,
Anna Nagar West Extension,
Chennai-600 101.
3. The Thasildhar,
Mambalam Division,
Chennai-600 078.
P. VELMURUGAN, J
Page No.7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Order dated 04.10.2023
in W.P.No.9990 of 2022
cs
W.P.No.9990 of 2022
04.10.2023
Page No.8/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
