Disposed

Karthickselvam v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC20 Dec 2024WP(MD)/31226/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a writ petition filed to direct the Assistant Director (Land Surveyor Officer) to survey and mark boundaries of the petitioner's property. The court directed the survey to be completed by 30.01.2025 after notice to necessary parties.

What did the court decide?

Directed the second respondent to conduct a survey and mark boundaries to be completed on or before 30.01.2025 after notice to parties.

Karthickselvam Vs The Tahsildar — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.31226 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.31226 of 2024

Karthickselvam

... Petitioner

1.The Tahsildar, O/o.Tahsildar Office, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District.

¶11

2.The Assistant Director, O/o.The Land Surveyor Officer, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District. ...Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to conduct survey and mark the boundaries of the property in S.No.248/8 to an extent of 6 cents situated in Neerathan Village, Mettu Neerathan, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District and to provide sketch for the same by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 16.11.2024 in accordance with law within time stiuplated by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Balamurugapandi For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

¶14

1/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.31226 of 2024

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The Writ Petition has been filed to direct the second respondent to conduct survey and mark the boundaries of the property in S.No.248/8 to an extent of 6 cents situated in Neerathan Village, Mettu Neerathan, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District and to provide sketch for the same by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 16.11.2024 in accordance with law within a time frame stiuplated by this Court.

¶19

2.By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶20

3.The contention of the Writ Petitioner is that the property situated in S.No.248/8 measuring to an extent of 6 cents situated in Neerathan Village, Mettu Neerathan, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District, was purchased by the Writ Petitioner in an auction conducted and the amount was also deposited in Court. The Writ Petitioner contended that at the time registration, the Registration Department has refused to register the same by contending that the boundaries were not reflected in the sale deed. The Writ Petitioner has filed an application before the respondents to survey the land in S.No.248/8

¶21

2/4

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.31226 of 2024

¶24

and a challan was also made on 24.12.2021.

¶25

4.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the second respondent shall conduct an enquiry, as the Writ Petitioner has made an application as early as on 24.11.2021 and that is pending for the past three years. The survey shall be completed on or before 30.01.2025 after giving notice to all necessary parties.

¶26

5.With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶27

20.12.2024 Internet :Yes/No Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No cmr To

¶28

1.The Tahsildar, O/o.Tahsildar Office, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District.

¶29

2.The Assistant Director, O/o.The Land Surveyor Officer, T.Vadipatti Taluk, Madurai District.

¶30

3/4

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.31226 of 2024

¶33

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

¶34

cmr

¶35

Order made in W.P(MD)No.31226 of 2024

¶36

20.12.2024

¶37

4/4

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Karthickselvam v. The Tahsildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karthickselvam v. The Tahsildar

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

A.Marimuthu, Vs R. Thangam

D.Arun Stalin Vs P.Ponkodi@Jasmine Poonkodi

Tamilnadu Generaton and Distribution Vs M.Maniam Proprietor

Subramanian Vs The District Revenue Officer cum Additional District Magistrate

M/s.Sri Jaya Vinayaga Tyres Vs The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board

P. Gopal Vs State Represented by