Dismissed¶31

Subramaniyan v. Prabakaran

Madras HC27 Mar 2026CONT P(MD)/601/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: contempt petition dismissed; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; Section 11 Contempt of Courts Act 1971; CONT P(MD) No.601 of 2026; W.P.(MD) No.7091 of 2025 order dated 17.03.2025; Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur District; Tahsildar Prabakaran; Taluk Chief Surveyor Kasthuri; Taluk Surveyor Valarmathi; petitioner Subramaniyan; survey conducted 02.06.2025; Tahsildar communication dated 18.09.2025; survey stones not fixed; minutes unsigned; no violation of writ order found; Justice P.B. Balaji; decided 27.03.2026.

What did the court decide?

Had no survey in fact been conducted, the petitioner ought to have responded to the Tahsildar's communication dated 18.09.2025; admittedly he did not, even though he enclosed that communication in his typed set and reproduced it in his affidavit, undermining his allegation that no survey was conducted.

Subramaniyan Vs Prabakaran — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents committed willful disobedience of / violated the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.7091 of 2025 dated 17.03.2025, warranting punishment for contempt. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

¶26

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's remaining grievance concerns non-fixation of survey stones, but fixing survey stones was not among the directions issued by this Court in its order dated 17.03.2025.

¶27

Key takeaways

The Court found no violation of its order dated 17.03.2025; hence the contempt petition fails.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt Petition (CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 27.03.2026 by Justice P.B. Balaji) filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 by Subramaniyan against the Tahsildar, Taluk Chief Surveyor and Taluk Surveyor of Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur District, alleging willful disobedience of this Court's order in W.P.(MD) No.7091 of 2025 dated 17.03.2025, which had directed a survey with the assistance of the Taluk Chief Surveyor and Taluk Surveyor and disposal of the petitioner's applications dated 30.07.2024 and 25.11.2024. The respondents relied on the Tahsildar's communication dated 18.09.2025 stating that the survey was conducted on 02.06.2025 in the petitioner's presence and that he refused to sign the minutes because survey stones were not fixed; the petitioner, despite enclosing and reproducing that communication in his affidavit, never responded to it. The Court held that non-fixation of survey stones was not a direction issued by it, found no violation of the order dated 17.03.2025, and dismissed the Contempt Petition.

¶1

CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 27/03/2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶6

CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026

¶7

Subramaniyan ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

Prabakaran, Thasildar, Krishnarayapuram Taluk, Karur District..

¶10

Kasthuri, Taluk Chief Surveyor Krishnarayapuram Taluk Office, Karur District..

¶11

Valarmathi, Taluk Surveyor Krishnarayapuram Taluk Office, Karur District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER :- Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to against the respondents herein for their willful disobedience and violated the order passed by this Honourable Court in W.P.(MD).No.7091 of 2025 dated 17-03-2025 and punish the respondents for contempt of Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. S. Mohammad Kasim

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026

¶17

Advocate. For Respondent : Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This petition has been filed against the respondents herein alleging willful disobedience and violation of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.7091 of 2025 dated 17.03.2025, and seeking punishment of the respondents for contempt of Court.

¶20

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court had directed that a survey be conducted with the assistance of the Taluk Chief Surveyor and the Taluk Surveyor of Krishnarayapuram Taluk Office, Karur District, and to dispose of the petitioner’s applications dated 30.07.2024 and 25.11.2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the survey has not been conducted as directed by this Court.

¶21

Per contra, Mr. B. Saravanan, learned Additional Government

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026

¶25

Pleader, invited my attention to the petitioner’s typed set and, by referring to the communication dated 18.09.2025 issued by the Tahsildar, Krishnarayapuram, to the petitioner, submitted that the survey was in fact conducted on 02.06.2025 in the presence of the petitioner, and that the petitioner refused to sign the minutes on the ground that survey stones were not fixed.

¶26

In fact, I find that the petitioner has not only enclosed the said communication in the typed set of papers filed in support of the contempt petition, but has also referred to and extracted its contents in the affidavit filed in support of the contempt petition. If, in fact, no survey had been conducted, the petitioner ought to have responded to the said communication. Admittedly, the same has not been done.

¶27

Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner appears to be only that survey stones were not fixed. However, that was not the direction issued by this Court. Hence, I do not find any violation of the order dated 17.03.2025.

¶28

3/5

¶29

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

¶30

CONT P(MD). No.601 of 2026

¶31