Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 62918 (MAD)

M. Chokkusamy Balasubramaniam v. K. Soundararajan

CMP(MD)/10773/2026 · 2026-08-11

C V Karthikeyan, R Sakthivel

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11-08-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL CMP(MD)No.10773 of 2026 in WA(MD)SR.No.63306 of 2026 M.Chokkusamy Balasubramaniam Petitioner(s) Vs. 1. K.Soundararajan 2. The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Virudhunagar District - 626 001. 3. The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar District - 626 001. 4. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Revenue Division, Sivakasi - 626 123, Virudhunagar District. 5. The Tahsildar, Rajapalayam Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District - 626 117. Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Chokkusamy Balasubramaniam For R2 to R5 : Mr.M.P.Senthil, Government Pleader Prayer: Petition filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, to grant leave to the petitioner/Appellant/3rd party to file this writ appeal to set aside the order in W.P.(MD) No. 17739 of 2026 dated 25.06.2026 passed by this Honourable Court and thus render justice. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J.) The petition has been filed seeking leave to file appeal against the order dated 25.06.2026 in W.P(MD)No.17739 of 2026. 2. The main grievance of the petitioner herein who is a 3rd party in the writ petition is that he was not impleaded as a party and that the writ petitioner had mentioned about O.S.No. 27 of 1974 on the file of the Sub Court, Tuticorin. The writ petition had been filed seeking to conduct survey relating to 1/6 undivided share in the family property at Survey No. 245/1 measuring 4 acres and 64 cents at Rajapalayam Village, Rajapalayam, Virudnagar District. Learned Single Judge had directed conducting of the survey, but however, has stated that if there are rival claimants, opportunity of hearing must be granted and thereafter appropriate orders must be passed. It is made clear that survey alone can be conducted by the 4th respondent namely, Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Revenue Division, Virudhunagar District. While conducting survey, he must take on record the objections of every individual including the present petitioner herein namely, Thiru.M.Chukkasamy Balasubramanian and also of any other rival claimants. The role of the Tahsildar is only to conduct survey and nothing more. 3. We are not inclined to grant leave, but however, the said directions are imposed on the Tahsildar at the time when he conducts survey. 4. This Petition stands dismissed. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis (C.V.KARTHIKEYAN J.) (R.SAKTHIVEL J.) 11-08-2026 bala To 1. The District Collector, O/o. District Collector, Virudhunagar District - 626 001. 2. The District Revenue Officer, District Revenue Office, Collectorate Campus, Virudhunagar District - 626 001. 3. The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi Revenue Division, Sivakasi - 626 123, Virudhunagar District. 4. The Tahsildar, Rajapalayam Taluk Office, Rajapalayam, V irudhunagar District - 626 117. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis