SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(Mad) 1404

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JAICHANDREN
M.B. Murugesan
Versus
The Commissioner, Tuticorin Municipality & Another
Writ Petition No. 992 of 2004 and W.P.M.P. No. 1012 of 2004
Decided on: 27-04-2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Subbiah, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, V. Raghupathi, R2, D. Krishnakumar, Advocates.

Disputes involving questions of fact regarding property rights should be addressed through civil proceedings rather than through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

Jurisdiction - Property Tax Assessment - Dismissal of Writ Petition

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner's property tax assessment was cancelled due to a dispute over the title of the land and building. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking relief.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the dispute involved questions of fact regarding the title of the land and building, and therefore, the writ petition was not maintainable. The petitioner was advised to establish their rights before the appropriate civil forum.

Issues: Jurisdiction of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that disputes involving questions of fact regarding property rights should be addressed through civil proceedings rather than through a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was advised to pursue remedies through the appropriate civil forum.

Judgment

1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the land and building situated in Town Survey No. 2 (Part) in B-Block in Municipal Ward No. 6 in Sankaraperi Village, corresponding to Old Survey No. 38 to an extent of 5.85 cents and the old building therein had been assessed in the name of the petitioner. However, by the impugned order, dated 212. 2003, the first respondent had cancelled the assessment of property tax made in the name of the petitioner stating that the patta granted in favour of the petitioners mother had been cancelled by the Sub Collector, Tuticorin and it had been become final.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court, under Article 226 of Constitution of India, since it involves questions of fact to be decided by way of civil proceedings.

4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the respondents, this Court is of the considered view that since the dispute, with regard to the title of the land in question, as well as the building therein, involves questions of fact and therefore, the writ petition filed before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable. However, it is open to the petitioner to establish his rights before the appropriate civil forum and to pursue the remedies available to him thereafter.

5. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is also closed.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top