Disposed¶42

Poolidurai v. The Tahsildar

Madras HC16 Jun 2025WP(MD)/16048/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus forbear land survey; pendency of application to set aside ex-parte decree no bar to survey; Tahsildar and Taluk Surveyor Sankaran Kovil Taluk Tenkasi; Keezhaneelithanallur Village S.Nos.1518/2, 1518/4, 1518/3; O.S.No.106 of 2009 Principal District Munsif Court Sankarankovil; ex-parte decree 11.10.2013; Article 226; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; S.Sounthar J.; 16.06.2025; disposed of, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Survey of the subject properties by the respondents will not affect the rights of either of the parties over the subject property. ¶8

Poolidurai Vs The Tahsildar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.16048 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.06.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.16048 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.12137 of 2025

Poolidurai

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Tahsildar, Sankaran Kovil Taluk, Tenkasi District.

¶11

The Taluk Surveyor, Sankaran Kovil Taluk, Tenkasi District.

¶12

Murugan

¶13

Vijayasanthi

¶14

Kaleeswari ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to forbear the respondents 1 and 2 from conducting survey in the subject properties in Survey Nos: 1518/2 measuring to the extent of 0.4.00 Hectare, 1518/4 measuring to the extent of 0.4.00 Hectare and 1518/3 measuring to the extent of 0.09.5

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.16048 of 2025

¶19

Hectare, situated in Keezhaneelithanallur Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tenkasi District, by considering my representation dated 22.05.2025.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Praveenkumar For R1 and R2 : Mr.A.Baskaran Additional Government Pleader For R3 to R5 : Mr.R.J.Karthick

¶21

ORDER

¶22

The petitioner herein seeks issuance of writ of mandamus forbearing

¶23

the respondents 1 and 2 from conducting survey of the properties situated in S.No.1518/2 with an extent of 0.4.00 Hectare, S.No.1518/4 with an extent of 0.4.00 Hectare and S.No.1518/3 with an extent of 0.09.5 Hectare, situated in Keezhaneelithanallur Village, Sankarankovil Taluk, Tenkasi District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 22.05.2025.

¶24

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.A.Baskaran,

¶25

learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.R.J.Karthick, who takes notice for the respondents 3 to 5.

¶26

2/6

¶27

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

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.16048 of 2025

¶29

By consent of both parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶30

It is seen from the averment found in the writ petition that private respondents filed a suit for declaration and injunction in respect of the subject property in O.S.No.106 of 2009 on the file of the Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil against the petitioner and others and obtained an ex-parte decree. Based on the said decree, they filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P(MD)Nos.26311 to 26313 of 2024 and obtained an order for survey of the subject property.

¶31

In the said writ petition, the petitioner herein was not arrayed as a

¶32

party. Therefore, the petitioner submitted instant representation before the respondents 1 and 2 on 22.05.2025, requesting them not to survey the property mainly on the ground that the petitioner herein filed an application seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree obtained by the private respondents. The representation submitted by the petitioner was not considered by the respondents 1 and 2. Hence, the petitioner has come before this Court.

¶33

3/6

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD)No.16048 of 2025

¶36

Mr.R.J.Karthick, learned counsel who takes notice for the private respondents would submit that till date notice has not been received by the private respondents in the alleged petition filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree.

¶37

It is seen from the ex-parte decree passed by the Principal District Munsif Court, Sankarankovil that private respondents obtained the ex-parte decree of declaration against the petitioner and 15 others in respect of the subject property on 11.10.2013. Admittedly the said ex-parte decree is still in force.

¶38

According to the writ petitioner, he has filed an application to set aside the ex-parte decree and the same is denied by the private respondents. Survey of the subject properties by the respondents will not affect the rights of either of the parties over the subject property. Therefore, merely because an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree is allegedly pending, the respondents need not refrain from surveying the property as per the directions ensured by this Court as mentioned above. It is for the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law before the Civil Court.

¶39

4/6

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.(MD)No.16048 of 2025

¶42