Jayanthi v. The Tahsildar, Uthiramerur
Case at a glance
- Bench
- P T ASHAWRIT
Outcome
Allowed
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and a Mandamus is issued to the first respondent to conduct survey in respect of the subject property
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and a Mandamus is issued to the first respondent to conduct survey in respect of the subject property. The petitioner shall submit all the relevant records to show her title to…
Judgment
WP.No.1765 of 2025In the High Court of Judicature at MadrasDated : 24.1.2025Coram :The Honourable Ms.Justice P.T.ASHAWrit Petition No.1765 of 2025 Jayanthi...PetitionerVs1.The Tahsildar, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram.
The Head Surveyor, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram....RespondentsPETITION under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to survey and demarcate the boundary of the petitioner's agricultural land situated at No.75, Vendivakkam Village, Chengalpattu District, ayan punja old S.Nos.75/1 and 75/1A as per patta No.141, new punja S.No.75/1A1 to an extent of 0.83 cents in 3.61 acres and issue separate patta in the name of the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.M.JaisinghFor Respondents: Mr.A.Selvendran, SGPORDERSeeking a Mandamus to the respondents to conduct a survey 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.1765 of 2025and demarcate the boundaries of the petitioner's property measuring 0.83 cents in 3.61 acres in ayan punja old S.Nos.75/1 and 75/1A as per patta No.141, new punja S.No.75/1A1, at No.75, Vendivakkam Village, Chengalpattu District, the petitioner is before this Court. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader accepting notice for the respondents.
The petitioner would contend that originally, the subject property was acquired by her father vide two sale deeds (i) dated 08.6.2001 registered as doc. No.1329 of 2001 and (ii) dated 02.6.2004 registered as doc. No.824 of 2004 on the file of the Sub-Registrar, Uthiramerur After the demise of her father, the petitioner, her mother and two sisters executed a release deed dated 12.3.2009 registered as doc. No.1187 of 2009 on the file of the same Sub-Registrar in favour of her brother in respect of the subject property. Later, her brother executed a settlement deed dated 12.6.2024 registered as doc. No. 2573 of 2024 on the file of the same Sub-Registrar in her favour in respect of the subject property. Pursuant to that, she is in possession and has been cultivating the same. Though the petitioner made two online applications on 06.9.2024 and 27.9.2024 respectively seeking to issue a patta and to conduct a survey and demarcate the 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.1765 of 2025boundaries of the subject property, nothing was forthcoming. Hence the writ petition.
The fact that the subject property belongs to the petitioner is seen from the narration in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. Since the petitioner acquired the subject property by way of the gift settlement deed, she requested the first respondent to issue patta, for which purpose, she also sought for surveying and demarcating the boundaries of the subject property.
Operative part
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and a Mandamus is issued to the first respondent to conduct survey in respect of the subject property. The petitioner shall submit all the relevant records to show her title to the subject property and the first respondent shall, after issuing notice to the adjacent land owners and interested parties, hold an enquiry and thereafter pass orders either surveying the subject property, demarcating its boundaries and issuing patta or rejecting the request. In the case of rejection, a speaking order shall be passed. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.1765 of 202524.1.20254/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP.No.1765 of 2025P.T.ASHA,JRSTo1.The Tahsildar, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram. 2. The Head Surveyor, Uthiramerur Taluk, Kancheepuram.WP.No.1765 of 202524.1.20255/5
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed and a Mandamus is issued to the first respondent to conduct survey in respect of the subject property
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.