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

2018 Supreme(Mad) 88

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
T. RAVINDRAN, J.
V.S. Rangasamy (died) & Others – Appellant
Versus
S.N. Subramanian – Respondent
S.A. No. 159 of 2001
Decided On : 03-01-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :S. Parthasarathy, Senior Counsel, for M/s. V.S. Kesavan, Advocate.
For the Respondent:R.T. Doraisamy, Advocate.

Headnote:

Tamil Nadu Surveys and Boundaries Act, 1923 - Section 12, 12 A and 12 B - Suit decree - Suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the plaint A schedule property and declaration and recovery of possession in respect of the B schedule property - Consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the respective parties and the submissions made, the trial Court was pleased to decree the suit as prayed for - Held, Records of the survey shall be a conclusive proof that the boundaries determined and recorded therein have been correctly determined as recorded and when the same had not been challenged and set-aside in the manner known law and the survey effected had not been shown to be done wrongly by the plaintiff, by acceptable and reliable materials, it is seen that the plaintiffs case for claiming the relief in the present list without any basis, has been rightly discountenanced by the first appellate Court - Appellate Court has rightly negatived the reliefs sought for by the plaintiff by setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court - It is found that the reasonings and conclusions of the first appellate Court on the factual aspects of the matter are not shown to be suffering from any perversity or not shown to be lacking support of the materials placed on record and when the plaintiff has also failed to establish his case by a high decree of preponderance of probabilities - Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

1. Challenge in this second appeal is made to the judgment and decree dated 22.12.2000, passed in A.S.No.72 of 1999, on the file of the Principal Sub-ordinate Court, Gobichettypalayam, reversing the judgment and decree dated 14.9.1999, passed in O.S.No.335 of 1991, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sathyamangalam.

2. Parties are referred to as per their rankings in the trial Court.

3. Suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of the plaint A schedule property and declaration and recovery of possession in respect of the B schedule property.

4. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that the plaintiff's paternal grandfather purchased an extent of 10.01 acres of land in old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village along with two Wells in the said survey field, through a registered sale deed dated 09.03.1924 and subsequently, his sons partitioned their family properties through a partition deed dated 14.09.1945 and under the said partition deed, the father of the plaintiff, S.R.Sinnasamychettiar was allotted 5 acres of land in common and one half of right in each of the two wells in S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village among other properties and similarly, the other brother S.R.Arumugamchettiar was allotted 5.01 acres of land in common and one half of the right in each of the two wells in old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam vilage and during the re-survey made in 1969, the old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village was re-numbered as new S.F.No.401. However, by mistake, the re-survey officials have carved out an extent of 0.05.0 hectares of land, in which, one of the wells is situated from the old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village and re-numbered as new S.F.No.79/1 of Malayadipudur village, as if, it was a part of old S.F.No.11 of Malayadipudur village and the patta for new S.F.No.79/1 was granted in the name of S.R.Arumugachettiar, the plaintiff's paternal uncle, who is looking after the property then and in fact, the new S.F.No. 139 of Sathyamangalam village was not a part of old S.F.No. 11 of Malayadipudur village as found in the re-survey records. The old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village and the old S.F.No.11 of Malayadipudur village are adjoining survey fields. After the death of the plaintiff's father and the paternal uncle, the plaintiff and the sons of S.R.Arumugachettiar were jointly in possession and enjoyment of the lands in both new S.F.No.401 of Sathyamangalam village and new S.F.No.79/1 of the Malayadipudur village and on 24.04.1991, they partitioned their properties through a registered partition deed and in that partition, the plaintiff was allotted an extent of 1.64.5 hectares of land in new S.F.No. 401/2 and 401/3 (old S.F.No.139 of Sathyamangalam village) and the suit properties, namely, an extent of 0.05.0 hectares of land in new S.F.No.79/1 of Malayadipudur village, along with the Well and electricity service connection in the survey field and the defendant owns land in new S.F.No.79/2 was a part of old S.F.No. 11 and thereby, forcibly encroached about 0.06 acre of land in New S.F.No.79/1, which is the B schedule property, however, the defendant has no right or title in respect of the same and even assuming that the suit properties form part of the old S.F.No.11, the plaintiff has perfected his title to the suit properties by way of adverse possession, on account of continuous enjoyment of the same, from the days of his predecessors in title since 1924 and the Well in the plaint A schedule property was dug more than 75 years back and the electricity service connection No.15 was obtained on 30.09.1955, in the name of the plaintiff's father and the paternal uncle. Hence, the defendant has no title or right to the suit properties and on the other hand, as the defendant had encroached into the B schedule property and trying to obstruct the plaintiff from drawing water from the Well in the suit A schedule property, according to the plaintiff he has been necessitated to lay the suit for





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

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