Allowed

Rajagopal(Died) v. P. Ilango

Madras HC10 Mar 2025WA(MD)/900/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Third-party writ appeal against an order directing survey of land in S.No.866/6, Veerapandi Village. The appellant had a pending injunction suit covering the same property and was not impleaded in the writ petition. Holding that obtaining the order behind the appellant's back was improper, the Division Bench set aside the Single Judge's order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 22.04.2022 in W.P.(MD)No.7719 of 2022 set aside; writ appeal allowed with no costs.

Rajagopal(Died) Vs P. Ilango — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022 and

¶7

C.M.P.(MD)No.7520 of 2022

Rajagopal (Died)

V.S.Veluthai

... Appellant

(Appellant is substituted vide order dated 22.08.2023 in C.M.P.(MD)No.5371 of 2023 in W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022 by SSSRJ & DBCJ)

¶12

Vs.

¶13

1.P. Ilango

¶14

2.The Tahsildar, Theni Taluk Office, Theni District.

¶15

3.The Taluk Surveyor, Theni Taluk Office, Theni.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the writ appeal and set aside the order dated 22-04-2022 passed in W.P.(MD).No.7719 of 2022 on the file of this Court.

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022

¶21

For Appellant : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For Respondents : Mr.Jayakarthick for R1 Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Addl. Government Pleader for R2 & R3.

¶22

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the court was delivered by G.R.Swaminathan, J.)

¶23

Heard both sides.

¶24

2.One Ilango filed W.P.(MD)No.7719 of 2022 for conducting survey of the property comprised in S.No.866/6 in Veerapandi Village. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition vide order dated 22.04.2022. Aggrieved by the same, this third party writ appeal has been filed. Leave was already granted.

¶25

3.It is seen that the appellant herein filed O.S.No.56 of 2020 before

¶26

the District Munsif Court, Theni seeking injunction in respect of the property comprised in S.No.866/1B which includes the petition mentioned property. The writ petitioner / Ilango is figuring as the second

¶27

2/4

¶28

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

¶29

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022

¶30

defendant in the said suit. The plaint was filed in the year 2020. The

¶31

writ petition was filed in the year 2022. By which time, the writ petitioner had already entered appearance in the suit. The writ petitioner ought to have impleaded the appellant herein in the writ petition. Obtaining an order behind the back of the appellant was clearly improper. On this sole ground, we set aside the order impugned in the writ appeal and the writ appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

(G.R.S. J.,) & (M.J.R. J.,) 10.03.2025

¶33

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias

¶34

To:

¶35

1.The Tahsildar, Theni Taluk Office, Theni District.

¶36

2.The Taluk Surveyor, Theni Taluk Office, Theni.

¶37

3/4

¶38

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

¶39

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022

¶40

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

¶41

ias

¶42

W.A.(MD)No.900 of 2022

¶43

10.03.2025

¶44

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

¶45

4/4

Rajagopal(Died) v. P. Ilango

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajagopal(Died) v. P. Ilango

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Janet Amala Arul Jothi Vs Samuel Raj

M.Gandhi Vs the Commissioner

Idol Sri Balasubramaniyaswamy, Vs Arukkani Ammal & Marappa

A.Pushpakala, Vs The Secretary to Government

The Project Director, Vs S. Shanmugasundaram

Paulraj(died)(Substituted by)T.Murugananda Prasad, Vs the District Collector