Madras High Court
Thangam @ Ponnaiah vs The District Collector on 18 September, 2025
Author: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Bench: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.09.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.(MD)No.25794 of 2025
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.20185, 20186 & 20188 of 2025
1.Thangam @ Ponnaiah
2.Veerachamy ...Petitioners
Vs
1.The District Collector,
The Collectorate Office,
Dindigul District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Natham Taluk,
Office of the Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
3.The Taluk Surveyor,
Office of the Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
4.Jeyaraman ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the
impugned enquiry summons issued by the 3rd respondent vide proceedings in
FL/RTR signed on 09.09.2025 and quash the same as illegal and without
jurisdiction and further direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents herein not to
dispossess petitioner without following the due process of law.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/09/2025 05:04:23 pm )
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram
for Mr.I.Velpradeep
For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman
Government Advocate for R1 to R3
Mr.S.Vinayak for R4
ORDER
A survey notice dated 09.09.2025, is challenged in this writ petition.
2.The petitioners assert that they are in physical possession of the
properties described in the affidavit in support of this writ petition. It is further
stated that the predecessor in interest of the 4th respondent had filed O.S.No.
1167 of 1992 and had obtained a Judgment and Decree in relation to title and
possession. The first appeal against the said Judgment and Decree was
dismissed. The second appeal was rejected for non prosecution. The petitioner
had filed WP(MD)No.7339 of 2022 challenging a similar survey notice issued
at the instance of the predecessor in title of the 4th respondent. Initially, an order
of interim stay was granted on 19.04.2022. Eventually, the writ petition was
dismissed by order dated 06.01.2025 by directing the petitioner to work out his
remedies in the pending O.S.No.44 of 2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/09/2025 05:04:23 pm )
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 12 year limitation
period for enforcing the decree in O.S.No.1167 of 1992 has expired. As a
consequence, he submits that rights have been created in favour of the petitioner
by way of adverse possession. He also refers to the suit filed by the petitioner in
O.S.No.44 of 2024 before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Natham.
By referring to the relief claimed therein, he points out that an interim
application has been filed to prevent the conduct of the survey. In these
circumstances, he submits that no survey should be conducted pursuant to the
impugned survey notice.
4.The writ petition is opposed by Mr.S.Vinayak, learned counsel who
accepts notice on behalf of the 4th respondent. He points out that the earlier writ
petition filed against the predecessor in interest of the 4th respondent was
dismissed by directing the petitioner to work out his remedy in the pending
O.S.No.44 of 2024. Therefore, he contends that a similar relief cannot be prayed
for against the successor in interest.
5.The record discloses that the suit filed by the predecessor in interest of
the 4th respondent against the petitioner for declaration and delivery of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/09/2025 05:04:23 pm )
possession was decreed on 28.02.1997. The petitioner failed before the first
appellate and second appellate courts. An earlier writ petition for the same relief
against the predecessor in interest of the 4th respondent was dismissed by
directing the petitioner to work out his remedies in the pending civil suit. The
petitioner has not obtained any interim order as on date in the pending civil suit.
6.In these circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise discretionary
jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner, especially against a survey notice.
Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of. Since I.A.No.280 of 2024 in
O.S.No.44 of 2024 is pending for a considerable period of time, the learned
District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Natham is directed to dispose of such
petition as expeditiously as the business of the court would allow. It is made
clear that this observation will not stand in the way of further proceedings
pursuant to the survey notice. No costs. Consequently, connected writ
miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
18.09.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
RJR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/09/2025 05:04:23 pm )
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
RJR
To
1.The District Collector,
Dindigul District,
The Collectorate Office,
Dindigul District.
2.The Tahsildar,
Natham Taluk,
Office of the Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
3.The Taluk Surveyor,
Office of the Natham Taluk,
Dindigul District.
18.09.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/09/2025 05:04:23 pm )
