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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 40813

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Srimathy, J
Prakasam – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Theni District, Theni – Respondent
WP(MD)No.1311 of 2013



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.T.Indrachithu
For the Respondents: Mr.D.Gandhiraj, Special Government Pleader

Court directs revenue authorities to survey and demarcate disputed land with procedural safeguards after notice to concerned parties.

Headnote:The statutory analysis reveals petitioner filing a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for conducting land survey and patta issuance. Facts include title chain originating from gift deed in 1960 and subsequent inheritance through successive oral partitions. Court determinations mandate survey compliance after due notice and incorporation of safeguards. Court frames the issue on adequacy of petitioner's representation and necessity for boundary demarcation and compliant survey execution. Ratio Decidendi establishes court's supervisory mandate over lower revenue authorities to implement survey and demarcation procedures rooted in procedural fairness. Court directs completion of exercise within three months with procedural safeguards.

Result: Petition disposed of with directions.

Table of Content
1. history of title and successive inheritances (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. mandatory survey process with safeguards and timelines (Para 4)
3. disposal with directions to parties (Para 5)

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to conduct a proper land survey on the petitioner's 30 cents of land comprised in S.No.190. situated at Alli nagaram village, Theni taluk, Theni District and measure and demarcate the boundaries and issue patta in favour of the petitioner based on the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2026.

2. The petitioner has stated in the affidavit that a larger extent of 12 acres and 84 cents comprised in Survey No. 190 originally belonged to one Thavasi Thevar and Ocha Thevar. After the demise of Ocha Thevar, Thavasi Thevar, along with the children of Ocha Thevar, including Palaniyandi Thevar and Muthusami Thevar, jointly executed a gift deed dated 16.05.1960 in favour of one Mookan @ Mayathevar, son of Periyakarupa Thevar, vide as Document Nos. S.R.O. 112, 474, 475, and 1208 of 1960. Based on the said gift deed, Mookan @ Mayathevar was in exclusive possession and enjoyment of the property, paid taxes, and mutated the patta in his name. The said Mookan @ Mayathevar died without any children.

Thereafter, his father, Periyakarupa Thevar, inherited the property. Subsequently, the petitioner’s father, namely P.S. Mayandi Thevar, who is the son of Periyakarupa Thevar and brother of Mookan @ Mayathevar, along with another brother Selvaraj, inherited the property. Periyakarupa Thevar and his sons, including the petitioner’s father and Selvaraj, entered into an oral partition, whereby the said property along with other self-acquired properties was divided. The extent of 12 acres and 84 cents in Survey No. 190 was allotted to the petitioner’s father and his brother Selvaraj, who were initially in joint possession and later effected a further oral partition, under which 6 acres and 42 cents each were allotted to them.

3. The petitioner's father sold the property by dividing the property and retained 30 cents. The petitioner's father had filed W.P.(MD)No.1311 of 2013 to survey and demarcate the property. The same was allowed on 24.01.2013, directing the respondents to survey the property. Subsequently, the petitioner’s father died, leaving behind his legal heirs, namely Prakasam, Inba Valli, Janaki, Kalavathi, Muthusamy, Paramasivam, and Maragatham, who have been in joint possession and enjoyment of the property. Now, the petitioner is seeking to survey and demarcate the property based on his representation.

4. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to submit the aforesaid particulars, along with the family tree, the gift deed dated 16.05.1960, and a copy of the patta, before the third respondent. On receipt of the same, the third respondent is directed to conduct a survey after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as to rival claimants, if any. If the third respondent requires police protection, the same shall be provided by the jurisdictional police. In case, if the petitioner is seeking to lay boundary stones, the same shall be laid at the cost of the petitioner. The official respondents shall adhere to the following Standard Operating Procedures:

• The official respondents shall issue notice to the petitioner immediately reaching the spot where survey is to be conducted. The petitioner shall affix the signature by receiving the notice of survey.

• After survey again the petitioner shall affix signature indicating that the survey was conducted to their satisfaction.

• If the petitioner is not satisfied, then also the petitioner shall affix signature indicating their dissatisfaction or with protest. The petitioner shall indicate that reason of their dissatisfaction or protest.

The aforesaid procedure shall be strictly followed by the parties. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receip

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