Disposed

S.Sivanesan v. The Thasildhar

Madras HC1 Apr 2016WP/11766/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition under Article 226, the Madras High Court directed the Tahsildar to consider the petitioner's representation to survey and demarcate specific land. The court mandated a personal hearing within twelve weeks but explicitly declined to express an opinion on the merits of the ownership claim.

What did the court decide?

Directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 8.3.2016 and pass appropriate orders after affording an opportunity of personal hearing within twelve weeks.

S.Sivanesan Vs The Thasildhar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

Writ Petition No.11766 of 2016

¶6

S.Sivanesan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.
1.The Tahsildar,
Sriperumbudur Taluk Office,
Kancheepuram District.
2.The District Collector,
Kancheepuram Collector Office,
Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents

¶8

Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents, particularly, the first respondent to order and direct the Taluk Surveyor attached to this office to survey and demarcate the boundaries of the land measuring 19 cents comprised in Survey No.540/2D2 pursuant to the application of the petitioner dated 8.3.2016.

¶9

For Petitioner : Ms.V.Kalaivani For Respondents : Mr.P.Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. Govt. Pleader. ORDER

¶10

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶11

The petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for a mandamus, directing the respondents, particularly, the first respondent to order and direct the Taluk Surveyor attached to his office to survey and demarcate the boundaries of the land measuring to an extent of 19 cents comprised in Survey No.540/2D2 pursuant to his application dated 8.3.2016.

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

It is the case of the petitioner that he is the absolute owner of the property in Survey No.540/2D2, comprised in an area of 19 cents situated in Padappai Village, Sriperumbudur Taluk, Kancheepuram District, having purchased the same by way of registered sale deed dated 26.11.1981 vide document No.6787 of 1981 before the Sub Registrar, Tambaram. Further, he has also purchased 8 cents from one Pushpammal by way of registered sale deed dated 8.12.1981 vide document No.7001 of 1981 before the Sub Registrar, Tambaram. While so, one Manoharan and Palani interfered with his peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said properties. Hence, the petitioner filed a civil suit in O.S.No.2333 of 1985 before the District Munsif Court, Poonamallee for declaration and permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner on 24.10.1994. Even after obtaining a decree in his favour, the said Manoharan and Palani along with their henchmen interfered with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the properties. Hence, in order to fix the boundaries of his property, the petitioner sent a letter dated 1.6.2015 to the respondents to make a visit and measure his properties and lay out the milestone. But, the respondents have not taken any action on the said letter. Finally, the petitioner made a representation dated 8.3.2016 to the respondents seeking to survey and demarcate the boundaries of the land measuring to an extent of 19 cents comprised in Survey No.540/2D2. Since the same was also not considered so far, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief set out earlier.

¶14

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submissions made on either side, this Court directs the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 8.3.2016 seeking to survey and demarcate the boundaries of his land measuring 19 cents comprised in Survey No.540/2D2, and pass appropriate orders / take appropriate action, on merits and in accordance with law, by affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner as well as to the necessary parties, if any, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the claim made by the petitioner and it is for the first respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

strictly on merits and in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶18

sbi

¶19

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar
To
1.The Tahsildar,
Sriperumbudur Taluk Office,
Kancheepuram District.
2.The District Collector,
Kancheepuram Collector Office,
Kancheepuram District.
+ 1 cc to Ms.V.Kalaivani, Advocate Sr 20695
+ 1 cc to The Govt.Pleader, Sr 20931
KR/18/4/16
W.P.No.11766 of 2016

¶22

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Sivanesan v. The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sivanesan v. The Thasildhar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Palani Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Uthaman Vs The Inspector General of

V.Anbazhagan Vs Union of India

C.Gunasekeran, Vs The Secretary

D.Mathesh, Vs The Inspector of Police

R.Mani, Vs The Inspector of Police