IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. RAJA W.P.No.12363 of 2010 And M.P.No.1 & 2 of 2010 Mrs. T.Kanchanadevi Wife of G.Thiyagarajan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Tahsildar, Sulur Taluk Office, Sulur, Coimbatore District. 2.The Taluk Sureyor Sulur Taluk Office, Sulur, Coimbatore District. 3.Dr.P.Balachander S/o.Dr.A.R.Purushothaman 4.S.K.Kaleeswaran S/o.Krishnaswamy 5.S.Veerakumaran S/o.Sundara Rajan ... Respondents (RR4 & 5 impleaded as per order dated 5.8.2010 made in MP.3/10) Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certirarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in proceeding O.M.R.T.R.No.1318/2010, dated 25.05.2010, quash the same and consequently, direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to effect sub- division of the lands in G.S.No.805, at Varapatty Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District, now in Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District by demarcating the boundaries of the portions belonging to the petitioner measuring 6.43 acres and effect a sub-division and grant patta. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : Mr.R.Muthu Kumarasami(SC) For Respondent : Mr.S.Sivashanmugam (GA) For R1 & R2. Mr.V.Radhakrishnan (SC) For S.Kadarkarai For R3. Mr.M.Ganesh For R4 & R5. ORDER The petitioner has come to this Court by filing the present writ petitioner under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, seeking a direction against the order passed by the 1st respondent in his O.M.R.T.R.No.1318/2010, dated 25.05.2010, quash the same and consequently, direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to effect sub- division of the lands in G.S.No.505, at Varapatty Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District, now in Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District by demarcating the boundaries of the portions belonging to the petitioner measuring 6.43 acres and effect a sub-division and grant patta. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's family is owning 20.89 acres of land but after some time this was subjected to partition on 10.12.1986. In the said partition, the land having an extent of 6.43 acres were allotted to the petitioner, Mrs.T.Kanchanadevi and an another portion of land having an extent of 14.46 acres of land was allotted in favour of the petitioners sister, Mrs.Kalpanarani. Subsequently, after the above said partition which took place on 10.12.1986, the petitioner's sister has sold away the 3 acres to one person and another 4.20 acres to the 3rd respondent, Dr.P.Balachander. In favour of the 4th respondent the lands having an extent of 5.41 acres was sold by way of two sale deeds and in favour of the 5th respondent, a land comprising of 4.85 acres was sold. Therefore, the total extent of land measuring 14.46 acres which were allotted in the name of the petitioner's sister, Mrs.Kalpanarani were sold sold away to the respondent 3,4, and 5. 3. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that the original allotment of land, namely 6.43 acres allotted by way of the partition on 10.12.1986 is not having the same extent of 6.43 acres. Therefore he has made out an application before the Tahsildar, to remeasure the lands but since, there was no response, the petitioner was constrained to file a writ petition in W.P.No.29291 of 2008, seeking a direction to the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ respondents 1 and 2 to consider her representation dated 30.10.2008 and 22.11.2008 for a sub division of lands measuring an extent of 20.89 acres. This Court disposed of the said writ petition by order dated 11.12.2008 directing the Tahsildar to consider the representation of the petitioner for sub division of the lands in question. Aggrieved by the said order, the 3rd respondent filed a writ appeal and subsequently, by withdrawing the same filed a civil suit on the file of the Sub-Court Tirupur, and during the pendency of the said civil suit, the petitioner also moved an Interlocutory Application for the rejection of the plaint. The learned Sub-Court accepting the case of the petitioner allowed the Interlocutory Application by rejecting the plaint filed by the 3rd respondent by an order dated 31.03.2010. 4. With these facts on hand the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.29291 of 2008 dated 11.12.2008, is given effect to, remeasuring the entire land namely 20.89 acres, neither the petitioner nor the respondent would be put to any prejudice, since the measurement of land will demarcate clear boundaries of all parties. 5. In reply the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent by strongly objecting the contentions raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that this Court cannot go into the disputed question of fact, since the Appeal No.774 of 2009, is pending on the file of the District Court. However it was also brought to the notice of this Court a letter addressed by the Tahsildar to the Government Pleader stating that the land was measured in pursuant to the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.29291 of 2008, dated 11.12.2008. Therefore, giving one more direction to the Tahsildar for the sub division will not serve the purpose. 6. However, his statement was heavily objected by the learned senior counsel for the respondent by adding that since the measurement which has been mentioned in the letter addressed by the Tahsildar to the Government Pleader of this Court has not been properly done in the presence of all the parties. 7. Taking into consideration the submissions made on either side, this Court to put an end to this controversy directs the District Surveyor to carry out the measurement of the lands in G..No.805 Varapatty Village, Palladam Taluk, Coimbatore District, once again in the presence of all the parties, namely, the petitioner and respondents 3,4 and 5 herein, after giving prior notice to all the parties. After the measurement, the Tahsildar shall inform the same to both parties. It is also made clear that in the event of any shortage of land the parties have to approach the appropriate civil Court for remedy. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Tahsildar, Sulur Taluk Office, Sulur, Coimbatore District. 2.The Taluk Sureyor Sulur Taluk Office, Sulur, Coimbatore District. + 1 cc to Mr. A. Jenasenan, Advocate SR No.11739 + 1 cc to M/s. S. Kadarkarai, Advocate SR No.12040 + 1 cc to Mr. M. Ganesh, Advocate SR No.11966 W.P.No.12363 of 2010 And M.P.No.1 & 2 of 2010 KSK(CO) SR/16.3.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/