Disposed¶22

M.Muthusamy v. Shanmuga Sundaram

Madras HC2 Apr 2026CONT P/227/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition (CONT P No. 227 of 2026), Madras High Court, decided 02-04-2026 by S. Sounthar J.; petitioner M.Muthusamy against Tahsildhar Shanmuga Sundaram and Taluk Surveyor Kumaravel, Pennagaram Taluk, Dharmapuri District; alleges disobedience of order dated 20.09.2024 in W.P. No. 27183 of 2024; filed under Section 11, Contempt of Courts Act; survey of S.No.558/1B1B completed, S.No.371/3 deferred pending correction of revenue records due to extent mismatch between sale deeds and pre-UDR FMB; petition closed with liberty for fresh survey application.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed, with liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh application for survey of the property situate in Survey No.371/3. ¶22

M.Muthusamy Vs Shanmuga Sundaram — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CONT P No. 227 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR

¶6

CONT P No. 227 of 2026

M.Muthusamy

..Petitioner(s)

Shanmuga Sundaram The Tahsildhar, Pennagaram Taluk, Pennagarm - 636 810, Dharmapuri District.

¶11

Kumaravel The Taluk Surveyor, Pennagaram Taluk, Pennagarm - 636 810, Dharmapuri District.

¶12

..Contemnor(s)

¶13

Prayer:- Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, pleased to punish the respondents for disobedience of this Court order dated 20.09.2024 made in WP.No.27183 of2024.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): M/s.M.R.Jothimanian For Contemnor(s): Mr.Abishek Murthy, Government Advocate

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The second respondent herein filed a compliance affidavit stating that

¶17

pursuant to the direction issued in the main Writ Petition the subject Survey No.558/1B1B was surveyed in the presence of petitioner and the adjacent land owners. It is further stated in the affidavit that when attempt was made to survey the property situate in Survey No.371/3, they found that there was a difference

¶18

Page1 of 3

¶19

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

¶20

CONT P No. 227 of 2026

¶21

in extent between registered sale deeds and old FMB prior to UDR. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a letter that fresh survey can be conducted after correction in the revenue records with regard to the extent. Therefore, the survey of property situate in Survey No.371/3 has been put on hold.

¶22

2.Since one survey number has been already surveyed and in respect of other survey number petitioner agreed for survey of the property after correction in the revenue records with regard to the extent, the Contempt Petition is closed with liberty to petitioner to make fresh application for survey of property situate in Survey No.371/3.

02-04-2026

To:-