Madras High Court
A.Shanmugam vs The District Collector on 14 September, 2023
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
1.A.Shanmugam
2.S.Rani ...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Tiruppur,
Tiruppur District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District.
3.The Tahsildar,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District.
4.The Firka Surveyor,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to
consider the petitioner representation dated 22.02.2023 for survey of their
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
land comprising in 122/2B2, 122/2B3 situated at Mukudu Jallipatti Village,
Udumalpet Taluk, Tiruppur District.
For Petitioners : Mr.K.Myilsamy
For Respondents : Mr.T.Arunkumar,
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the
respondents 3 and 4 to consider the petitioners' representation dated
22.02.2023 for surveying the land comprised in Survey Nos. 122/2B2,
122/2B3 situated at Mukudu Jallipatti Village, Udumalpet Taluk, Tiruppur
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
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 petitioners is also similar to
that of the cases (cited supra), the case of the petitioners is also to be
considered on the same line.
4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.
14.09.2023
Index:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
Speaking order
hvk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
hvk
To
1.The District Collector,
Tiruppur,
Tiruppur District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District.
3.The Tahsildar,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District.
4.The Firka Surveyor,
Udumalpet,
Tiruppur District.
W.P.No.26959 of 2023
14.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
