S. Soundaram v. S. Malar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.09.2023 CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU S.Soundaram .. Appellant Vs

1. S.Malar

2. The Tahsildar Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk Salem District.

3. The Taluk Surveyor Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk Salem District.

.. Respondents Prayer : Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.34556 of 2022, dated 22.12.2022.

For the Appellant : Mr.P.Jagadeesan For the Respondents : Mr.P.Muthukumar State Government Pleader assisted by Mrs.R.Anitha Special Government Pleader for respondents 2 and 3

JUDGMENT

(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) We have heard Mr.P.Jagadeesan, learned counsel for the appellant; and Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader, assisted by Mrs.R.Anitha, learned Special Government Pleader, for respondents 2 and 3.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the present appellant was the third respondent in the writ petition filed by the first respondent herein. The learned Single Judge, without issuing notice to the appellant, had straight-away issued directions for survey of the property.

3. According to learned counsel for the appellant, the original writ petitioner did not have any right, title or interest in respect of the subject writ property. The suit filed by the original writ petitioner is dismissed for default. The suit filed by the present

appellant for declaration that the cancellation of the settlement is illegal, with all other consequential reliefs, is pending adjudication. A person who does not have title could not have sought for survey of the land.

4. We have gone through the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge, under the impugned order, has not decided the rights of the parties. The statement of learned Government Advocate to the effect that after issuing notice to the original writ petitioner and the appellant herein survey would be conducted is recorded. The respondent authority is only required to conduct a survey and nothing beyond that. Naturally, the decision given by the civil court will be binding upon the revenue authorities also. As no rights have been decided by learned Single Judge under the impugned order, no further orders are required to be passed in this appeal.

The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. Needless to state that all the contentions of the parties are kept open. There will be

no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.20480 of 2023 is closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.) 11.09.2023 Index :

Yes/No Yes/No sasi To:

1. The Tahsildar Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk Salem District.

2. The Taluk Surveyor Pethanaickenpalayam Taluk Salem District.

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.

(sasi) 11.09.2023