Back
2013 Supreme(Mad) 381
MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. JAICHANDREN, J.
Padikalai
Versus
District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai & Others
W.P.(MD) No. 2622 of 2009
Decided On: 17-01-2013
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mrs. S. Vijayashanthi, Advocate.
For the Respondents:K. Mahesh Raja, Government Advocate.
Headnote:
Survey - Land Dispute - The court directed the third respondent to survey the land in question and established that the act of surveying would not vest any additional right or claim in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner would need to establish title relating to the property in question before the appropriate forum if any dispute arises.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought relief in a Writ Petition related to a land dispute. The respondents highlighted pending appeals and civil suits related to the land in question. The petitioner claimed possession and occupation of the land for a long time.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the third respondent to survey the land in question within 12 weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other concerned parties. The act of surveying would not vest any additional right or claim in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner would need to establish title relating to the property in question before the appropriate forum if any dispute arises.
Issues: Pending appeals and civil suits related to the land, possession and occupation of the land by the petitioner, and the relief sought in the Writ Petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to allow the survey of the land in question but made it clear that it would not vest any additional right or claim in favor of the petitioner. The petitioner would need to establish title relating to the property in question before the appropriate forum if any dispute arises.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was disposed of with the direction for the survey of the land in question and the clarification that the act of surveying would not vest any additional right or claim in favor of the petitioner.
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that a second appeal, in S.A.No.122 of 2004, is pending on the file of this Court, relating to the land in question. He had further submitted that the adjacent land owner has also filed a civil suit, in O.S.No.21 of 2006, before the District Munsif Court, Melur, and it is pending adjudication.
3. In such circumstances, the relief prayed for by the petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, cannot be granted. However, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner had filed a suit for bare injunction, in O.S.No.141 of 1997, before the District Munsif Court, Melur, and the said suit had been decreed, in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the defendant had filed an appeal, in A.S.No.112 of 1998, before the I Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, and the said appeal had been dismissed. Thereafter, the defendant in the said suit had filed a second appeal before this Court, in S.A.No.122 of 2004, which is pending adjudication. However, there is no interim order granted by this Court in the said second appeal. She had further submitted that there is no dispute with regard to the title of the land in question, as it belongs to the petitioner. He has been in possession and occupation of the land in question, for a long time.
4. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents, the third respondent is directed to survey the land in re-survey No.159, Mangulam Village, Madurai District, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as well as the other parties concerned, if there are no legal impediments to do so. However, it is made clear that the act of surveying of the land in question shall not vest any additional right or claim, in respect of the property concerned, in favour of the petitioner. The title relating to the property in question shall be established by the petitioner, if any dispute arises with regard to the same, before the appropriate forum, in the manner known to law. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions.
No costs.
