VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

R.Jeyaram v. The Tahsildar

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
30 March 2026
Bench
S Justice S.Srimathyauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 8565/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow S Justice S.Srimathy

Judgment

O R D E R This petition has been filed to direct the respondents to survey the land comprised in Survey No.63/1B1A having an extent of 0.26.14 hectares situated at Gurunathanaickanoor Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District within the time frame fixed by this Court.

¶2The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the property originally belonged to R. Nithyaselvai, who executed a registered sale deed in favour of L. Ilango under Document No. 232 of 2018, dated 01.02.2018. Subsequently, the said Ilango executed another sale deed in favour of the petitioner and Thirumalaisamy under Document No. 542 of 2021, dated

22.02.2021. Thereafter, the petitioner and Thirumalaisamy have been in possession and enjoyment of the property, and a patta has been issued in their names under Patta No. 3181. The petitioner is now seeking to survey and demarcate the property.

¶3Heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶4Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the 1st respondent to conduct the survey with the assistance of the second respondent after issuing notice to the petitioner as well as Thirumalaisamy who is the joint pattadhar. If necessary, seek police protection, the Jurisdictional police shall provide police protection to survey the land. The Court is also directing the Official respondents to adhere to the following Standard Operating Procedures: a. 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. b. After survey again the petitioner shall affix signature indicating that the survey was conducted to their satisfaction.

c. 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 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶5With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

30.03.2026 Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes NCC : Yes / No

msrm To

¶1The Tahsildar Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶2The Taluk Surveyor, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶3The Special Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai S.SRIMATHY, J msrm

30.03.2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.03.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY R.Jeyaram ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Tahsildar Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District. 2. The Taluk Surveyor, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to survey the land comprised in Survey No.63/1B1A having an extent of 0.26.14 hectares situated at Gurunathanaickanoor Village, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District within the time frame fixed by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prithviraj For Respondents : Mr.D.Gandhiraj Special Government Pleader

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.