Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 4565
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENGH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S.Sounthar, J.
Manimuthu - Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector and ors. - Respondents
W.P.(MD) No.2243 of 2023
Decided On : 12-06-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed
For the Respondent: Mr.A.Baskaran, Addl. Govt. Pleader, Mr.D.Senthil
Land disputes arising from inheritance and property claims must be resolved within civil courts rather than administrative surveys when civil suits are pending.
Headnote:(A) Writ of Mandamus - Dispute over land ownership - Petition filed for prohibitory orders regarding land survey - Occurrence of prior civil suit with pending injunction application raised by one party - Court directs the parties to resolve the dispute before civil court separately. (Paras 1, 7, 8)
(B) Jurisdiction of Survey Authority - Defines the extent of survey authority's powers concerning objections from interested parties and limits enforcement of survey to avoid dispossession. (Paras 4, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner claims ownership inherited from his deceased father, while the 4th respondent alleged fraudulent acquisition of land and initiated civil proceedings.
Issues: The main issues include the legality of the respondents' requests for land survey given the existing civil suit and the jurisdiction of the survey authority amidst disputes.
Findings of Court:
The court highlights the necessity for resolving property disputes through civil proceedings rather than via the survey process, indicating that the ongoing civil matter precludes immediate survey actions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that property disputes should be adjudicated within the civil justice framework and that simultaneous administrative actions could lead to conflicting outcomes.
Result: Writ Petition stands disposed of with directions to approach civil court.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership dispute and pending civil suits. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. court's directions for conducting land surveys. (Para 4) |
| 3. arguments on the validity of the survey. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. importance of resolution in civil court. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. order for the dismissal of writ petition. (Para 9) |
ORDER :
S. Sounthar, J.
This Writ Petition is filed seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents 1 to 3 to survey of the land situate in S.No. 111/6C with an extent of 5 cents in Thiruppachethy South Village, Thiruppuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District.
2. Heard the arguments of Mr.D.S.Haroon Rasheed, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.A.Baskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.D.Senthil, learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 and 5.
3. According to the petitioner, the above mentioned property belonged to his father Angusamy Servai. He died leaving behind his five children viz., the petitioner, 4th respondent Ganesan, Mohan, Gunasekaran and Jeyaraman as his legal heirs. After demise of petitioner's father, a dispute arose between the fourth respondent and other children of Angusamy Servai. According to the petitioner, the fourth respondent obtained forged patta in his name and filed a civil suit in O.S.No.16 of 2021 on the file of District Munsif, Thiruppuvanam, Sivagangai District against the petitioner and two others. The said suit is still pending. In the meantime, the 5th respondent, wife of 4th respondent, who was also arrayed as plaintiff in the civil suit, moved a Writ Petition before this Court in W.P.(MD)No.29103 of 2022 seeking to survey of the property in respect of three survey numbers including S.No.111/6C, which is the subject matter of this Writ Petition.
4. The above Writ Petition was disposed of with the following directions:
“2. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:-
(I) The survey authority will issue notice to the writ petitioner as well as the adjacent land owners and also to the interested persons, if any.
(II) Enquiry shall be held. During enquiry, objections raised by the adjacent land owners / interested persons shall be considered.
(III) If according to the jurisdictional authority, the objections are without any basis, the same shall be overruled and the objectors shall be informed accordingly. But the survey will be conducted only after a period of six weeks so that the objector can move the concerned Court for injunction. If before the proposed date of survey, the objector is unable to obtain any injunction order, the survey can very well go on. It is open to the parties to serve memo of instructions to the surveyor at the time of conducting the survey. The same will be borne in mind. While it cannot be binding on the surveyor, the same will be taken note of.
(IV) If the jurisdictional authority finds objections to be having substance, then, he shall call upon the applicant to move the jurisdictional civil Court for agitating his rights.
(V) If required, the survey authority is empowered to seek aid of the jurisdictional police and the jurisdictional police are mandated togrant police protection.
(VI) It is made clear that at the end of the survey exercise, survey stones alone can be installed. The exercise of survey and demarcation undertaken pursuant to the direction of this Court can never result in dispossession of any party. No person shall put up fencing at the time of survey by using police aid. The Survey Authority will pass order within a period of six weeks after service of notice on the interested persons.
(VII) A copy of the survey report will be served on the parties also. No costs.”
Since the official respondents are attempted to survey the property as per the order passed by this Court in the earlier Writ Petition, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking the above mentioned prayer.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondents 4 and 5 already moved the civil
