Back
2008 Supreme(Mad) 1045
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. PALANIVELU
The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the District Collector Kamarajar District & Another
Versus
R.P. Patchirajan & Another
S.A.(MD)No.821 of 1996
Decided On :Decided on : 25-03-2008
For the Appellants: K.M. Vijayakumar, Additional Govt. Pleader.
For the Respondents:Mahendran, A. Thirumurthy, Advocates.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of adverse possession principles to establish ownership of properties, particularly in the context of Village Natham and the interpretation of relevant land laws.
Headnote:
Adverse Possession - Property Dispute - Land Encroachment Act, 1905, Section 2 - Madras Act XXVI of 1948, Section 18 - Village Natham - [KEYWORD] - Property Dispute - Land Encroachment Act, 1905, Section 2, Madras Act XXVI of 1948, Section 18
Fact of the Case:
The suit involved a dispute over vacant properties in a village, with the plaintiffs claiming ownership through adverse possession, while the defendants asserted that the properties were poramboke land belonging to the Government.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the properties belonged to the plaintiffs based on their continuous possession and enjoyment, rejecting the defendants' claim that the properties were communal land or belonged to the Government.
Issues: The issues revolved around the ownership of the vacant properties, the applicability of the possession follows title principle to Natham properties, and the conclusive nature of the survey register.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the principle of adverse possession, interpreting the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and Madras Act XXVI of 1948 to support the plaintiffs' claim of ownership based on their continuous possession and enjoyment of the properties.
Final Decision: The second appeal was dismissed, affirming the lower courts' findings that the properties belonged to the plaintiffs.
Aggrieved by the concurrent judgments passed by the Courts below, the appellants have preferred the present Second Appeal.
2. The allegations in the plaint, in short, are as follows:-
The suit properties are vacant sites situated in the revenue village of Keelarajakularaman Village, Rajapalayam Taluk. The first item of the plaint schedule originally belonged to one D.Rama Iyengar, who in turn sold the same to the plaintiffs father R.P.Ponnuchamy Iyengar on 06.03.1942. The second item property originally belonged to one Muthammal wife of Muthu Iyengar, who sold it to the said R.P.Ponnuchamy Iyengar on 08.08.1941. He had been in possession and enjoyment till his death. After his demise, the plaintiffs as his legal heir are exercising the right of ownership over the properties. The properties are still remaining as vacant sites. The plaintiffs and the predecessors-in-title have been in possession and enjoyment of the suit properties openly and adversely against the third parties including the Government for more than the statutory period. They have prescribed title by adverse possession also. The second defendant has been giving out that the plaint schedule properties will be assigned by way of issuing house site pattas to houseless persons as if the suit properties are belonging to the Government. They have no right to do so. Hence, the suit has been laid for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants.
3. The averments contained in the written statement filed by the first defendant in brief are as follows:-
One Mayandi and 17 others residing in Keelarajakularaman Village applied for assigning of house sites on 14.08.1987 in Survey No.1647/1 in Keelarajakularaman Revenue Village under the Prime Minister’s 20 Point Programme. The said survey No. is classified as “Natham” in the village accounts. It is a vacant site and it is not in possession of any individual in the village. It is unbelievable to state that four decades ago, the father of the plaintiffs purchased the properties. Neither the plaintiffs nor their father had ever exercised any right over the properties. It is a poramboke land and the title of land vests only with the Government. The predecessors of plaintiffs purchased Natham poramboke land without ascertaining whether the vendor had any valid legal and transferable right over the property. The judgment in O.S.No.56 of 1962 dated 20.04.1963 on the file of District Munsif Court, Srivilliputtr, does not bind on these defendants, since they are nor parties to it. This is a suit for partition between the family members of the plaintiffs. The suit sites have been utilised by the village people for conducting drama and folk dance which indicates that the suit properties are not used by the plaintiffs as their own property, as such the suit should be dismissed.
4. The District Munsif Court, after trial, decreed the suit, as prayed for.
5. The matter was carried in appeal by the present appellants before the Sub-Court, Srivilliputhur. The said Court also turned down the claim of the appellants confirming the judgment of the trial Court. Hence this second appeal.
6. While admitting the Second Appeal, the following substantial questions of law were framed:-
“1. Whether the principle that the possession follows title would be applicable to cases of Nathan properties also where in law no body is the owner of the Natham land.
2. Whether the use of land for communal purposes where a common latrine for the villagers has also been constructed would debar the respondents herein from invoking the principle that possession follows title in respect of vacant lands.
3. Whether the survey register where in it has been recorded that the suit land is a poromboke land is conclusive and binding upon the parties.”
7. The suit properties are two items of vacant sites situated in Keelarajakularaman Village in Rajapalayam Taluk. The first item is admeasuring east west 19 yards and north south 15 yards, while the second item
