Disposed

Sahayaraj v. The Thasildar

Madras HC4 Jul 2025WP(MD)/18231/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought mandamus to survey and fix boundaries of his patta land in Survey No.198/3 after his application went unconsidered; respondents claimed a survey was done but the acknowledgement signature did not tally. Court directed consideration of the application with notice within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to consider the online application dated 30.01.2025 and pass final orders on merits within eight weeks after notice to interested parties.

Sahayaraj Vs The Thasildar — Property and Title | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.07.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶7

Sahayaraj ... Petitioner Vs 1 The Thasildar, Srirengam, Trichy District. 2 The Head Surveyor, Srirengam, Trichy District. ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to survey and fix the boundaries of the petitioner's land being survey number 198/3 an total extent of 47 cents situated at Navallurkuttapattu, Srirengam Taluk, Trichy, with the aid of the 3rd respondent, based on the petitioner's application, dated 30.01.2025.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Kesavan

¶10

For Respondents : Mr.A.Baskaran, Addl. Govt. Pleader.

¶11

_____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶12

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

¶13

ORDER

¶14

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶15

The petitioner herein seeks a direction to the respondents to survey and fix the boundaries of the property situated in Survey No.198/3 with an extent of 47 cents situated at Navallurkuttapattu, Srirengam Taluk, Trichy District. by considering his application, dated 30.01.2025.

¶16

It is the case of the petitioner that the subject property was settled by his maternal grandmother and mother under a settlement deed, dated 22.03.2012, and patta for the property also stands in the name of the petitioner in Patta No.1039. The petitioner submitted an application vide Application No.2025/0123/15/004782, dated 30.01.2025, seeking survey of the subject property. The same has not been considered. Hence, he has come before this Court.

¶17

Additional Government Pleader, who takes notice for the respondents, would submit, that, in response to the online application of the petitioner, survey was conducted on 12.05.2025. He also produced acknowledgement with the signature of the petitioner.

¶18

A perusal of the acknowledgement would indicate that somebody signed in the column, meant for applicant. The signature found in the acknowledgement produced by the Additional Government Pleader is not

¶19

Page 2 of 4

¶20

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

¶21

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶22

tallying with the signature of the petitioner in the affidavit. Counsel for the petitioner also, on instructions, submits that survey was not conducted in the presence of the petitioner.

¶23

Taking into consideration all these facts, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, this Court directs the respondents to consider the online application of the petitioner, dated 30.01.2025, and pass final orders on its own merits within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, after issuing notice to petitioner, neighbouring land owners, and other interested parties.

¶24

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶25

04.07.2025

¶26

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

¶27

dixit

¶28

To: 1 The Thasildar, Srirengam, Trichy District.

¶29

2 The Head Surveyor, Srirengam, Trichy District.

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶33

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

¶34

dixit

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.18231 of 2025

¶36

04.07.2025

¶37

_____________ Page 4 of 4_

¶38

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

Sahayaraj v. The Thasildar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahayaraj v. The Thasildar

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

D.S.Selvam Vs The District Collector

Jesu .C.a Vs District Collector

Varadarajan Vs The District Collector

Chandran Vs The Tahsildar

M.Murugesan Vs The Tahsildar

Theththan G Vs The District Collector