Dismissed

Thilagavathi v. the Commissioner

Madras HC3 Mar 2021WP(MD)/1692/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the petitioner sought directions for survey and marking of land boundaries. The respondent Special Government Pleader submitted that survey was conducted and a discrepancy existed, advising the petitioner to approach the civil court. The court dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to pursue remedies in the civil court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; petitioner directed to approach competent civil court for remedies.

Thilagavathi Vs the Commissioner — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.1692 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.03.2021 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN

¶4

W.P.(MD) No.1692 of 2021

Thilagavathi

.. Petitioner

1.The Commissioner, Kulithalai Municipality, Kulithalai.

¶9

2.The Tahsildar (Land Survey), Taluk Office, Kulithalai, Karur District.

¶10

3.The Town Surveyor, Kulithalai Municipal Office, Kulithalai, Karur District.

¶11

.. Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's application dated 14.12.2020 and thereby survey and mark boundaries of the petitioner's land in S.F.No.85/5B in Otta Street, Kulithalai now resurveyed as T.S.No.28 in Block No.18 in Ward D of Kulithalai Municipality Karur District.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Madhu For R1 : Mr.L.P.Maurya Standing Counsel For R2 & R3 : Mr.C.Ramesh Special Government Pleader

¶14

ORDER

¶15

When the matter is taken up for hearing today, Mr.C.Ramesh, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 and 3 would submit that survey has been conducted and since there was discrepancy between the sale deed of the petitioner and the revenue records, the petitioner was advised to approach the competent civil Court and in this connection, a copy of the communication of the Municipality Sub Inspector, Kulithalai in Na.Ka.No.1793/20/B2, dated 02.03.2021 is also produced before this Court.

¶16

2.In view of the above, this Court does not think that the writ petition can be kept pending anymore and therefore, the same stands dismissed. It is always open to the petitioner to approach https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

1/2

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.1692 of 2021

¶19

the competent civil Court to workout her remedies in a manner known to law. No costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar (CSIII)

¶22

// True Copy //

¶23

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶24

¶25

1.The Tahsildar (Land Survey), Taluk Office, Kulithalai, Karur District. 2.The Town Surveyor, Kulithalai Municipal Office, Kulithalai, Karur District.

¶26

+1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-8680[F] dated 04/03/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.L.P.MAURYA, Advocate ( SR-8513[F] dated 03/03/2021 )

¶27

W.P.(MD)No.1692 of 2021 03.03.2021

¶28

ES(CO) KB(17.03.2021) 2P 5C

¶29

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

¶30

2/2

Thilagavathi v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thilagavathi v. the Commissioner

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

Karthikeyan Vs Union of India

Ulaganathan Vs the District Collector

K. Gopalakrishnan Vs the District Registrar

A.Antony Yagappa, Vs the Union of India, Repd. by

Balakrishnan.R Vs the Sub-Registrar

Krishnamoorthy Raja. N.R Vs The District Registrar(Admin)