Dismissed¶39

Ponraj v. Murugesan

Madras HC1 Sept 2025WA(MD)/2500/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal dismissed; survey and demarcation direction to Tahsildar, Nilakkottai Taluk confirmed; property Survey No.263 6C, Kullalakundu, Dindigul District; rival claim between brothers; appellant impleaded as R4 in writ petition; title/ownership left to partition suit O.S.No.549 of 2025 (Sub Court, Jeyalakshmi); survey to proceed after notice to appellant and R1 and in their presence; Clause XV Letters Patent Act; mandamus; no costs; C.M.P(MD)No.14404 of 2025 closed.

What did the court decide?

None to the appellant; the directions issued by the learned Judge in W.P.(MD)No.13384 of 2025 stand confirmed, with the survey and demarcation to be conducted after notice to the appellant and R1 and in their presence; connected Miscellaneous Petition closed; no costs. ¶39

Ponraj Vs Murugesan — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ appeal should interfere with the conclusions/directions of the learned Judge in W.P.(MD)No.13384 of 2025 directing the Tahsildar to conduct a survey and demarcate the boundaries of the property.

¶33

Court's answer

The apprehensions raised by the appellant regarding the averments contained in the affidavit hardly merit consideration, as the Division Bench is concerned only with the conclusions of the learned Judge in the impugned order, with which it is in agreement.

¶33

Ratio / Principle

Since the question of title and ownership, including of the present property, will be decided in O.S.No.549 of 2025 (partition suit filed by the appellant's sister), the exercise of survey and demarcation shall be conducted after issuance of notice to the appellant and R1 and in their presence.

¶38

Key takeaways

The Writ Appeal is dismissed confirming the directions issued by the learned Judge, with no costs, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (C.M.P(MD)No.14404 of 2025) is closed.ratio¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (Madurai Bench, Madras High Court) under Clause XV of the Letters Patent Act against the order dated 18.06.2025 in W.P.(MD)No.13384 of 2025, whereby the Tahsildar was directed to survey and demarcate the boundaries of the property in Survey No.263 6C, Kullalakundu, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District, and fix a timeline. The appellant, brother of the writ petitioner asserting a rival claim, who had been impleaded as R4 in the writ petition, raised apprehensions regarding the affidavit averments. Held: the apprehensions hardly merit consideration; the Division Bench agreed with the conclusions of the learned Judge. Noting that title and ownership, including of the suit property, would be decided in O.S.No.549 of 2025 (partition suit by Jeyalakshmi, stated to be the appellant's sister, on the file of the Sub Court), the Court directed that the survey and demarcation be conducted after issuance of notice to the appellant and R1 and in their presence. Writ Appeal dismissed confirming the learned Judge's directions; no costs; connected C.M.P(MD)No.14404 of 2025 closed.

¶1

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 01.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶7

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025 and

¶8

C.M.P(MD)No.14404 of 2025

¶9

Ponraj

¶10

... Appellant/4^th Respondent

¶11

Vs.

¶12

1.Murugesan

¶13

... 1^st Respondent/Petitioner

¶14

2.The Tahsildar, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶15

3.The Surveyor, Nilakkottai Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶16

4.The Inspector of Police, Nilakottai Police Station, Dindigul District. ... Respondents 2 to 4/ Respondents 1 to 3

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025

¶20

PRAYER:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, to

¶21

PRAYER:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.13384 of 2025 dated 18.06.2025 on the file of this Court.

¶22

For Appellant : Mr.K.Navaneetharaja For RR 2 & 3 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R – 4 : Mr.P.Kottaichamy Government Advocate

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

(Judgment of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

¶25

W.P(MD)No.13384 of 2025 has been filed by R1 in Appeal.

¶26

The prayer was for a Mandamus directing the Tahsildar and the Surveyor of Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District to conduct a survey and demarcate four boundaries in respect of the property in Survey No.263 6C situated at Kullalakundu, Nilakottai Taluk, Dindigul District (property/properties) and to issue a survey report.

¶27

2.The appellant would point out that the Writ Petition was filed

¶28

only against the official respondents. The present appellant, who is the 2/6

¶29

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

¶30

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025

¶31

brother of the writ petitioner and is asserting a rival claim over the property, later got himself impleaded as R4 in the Writ Petition.

¶32

3.Be that as it may, the Writ Petition was disposed of, incidentally without any counters by any of the respondents. However, the learned Judge has had the benefit of hearing the submissions of the appellant as well as R1. In conclusion, she has disposed of the Writ Petition directing the Tahsildar to conduct a survey and demarcate the boundaries of the property and fixing the time line to do so.

¶33

4.Before us, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would raise certain apprehensions in the averments contained in the affidavit. This submission hardly merits consideration, as we are only concerned with the conclusions of the learned Judge in the impugned order with which we are in agreement.

¶34

5.Further, O.S.No.549 of 2025 has been filed by one Jeyalakshmi, stated to be the sister of the appellant, on the file of the Sub

¶35

3/6

¶36

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

¶37

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025

¶38

Court, seeking partition of the family properties and other connected prayers. The question of title and ownership, including that of the present property, will hence be decided in the said suit. Let the exercise of survey and demarcation be conducted, after issuance of notice to the appellant and R1 and in their presence.

¶39

5.With the above observations, this Writ Appeal is dismissed confirming the directions issued by the learned Judge. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶40

[A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 01.09.2025

¶41

NCC :Yes Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes ps

¶42

4/6

¶43

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

¶44

W.A.(MD)No.2500 of 2025

¶45

¶46