High Court Kerala High Court

S.B.Srinivasan vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 3 December, 2008

Kerala High Court
S.B.Srinivasan vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 3 December, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35622 of 2008(N)


1. S.B.SRINIVASAN, S/O.N.S.BAYYA,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TALUK SURVEYOR, MANNARKKAD,

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOTTATHARA,

4. DASAN, S/O.NARIAMUPPAN,

5. KALIAPPAN, S/O.NARIAMUPPAN,

6. NARAYANAN, S/O.DASAN, -DO-, -DO-.

7. PAPPA, W/O.NARAYANAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI

 Dated :03/12/2008

 O R D E R
                        V.GIRI, J
                      -------------------
                  W.P.(C).35622/2008
                      --------------------
      Dated this the 3rd day of December, 2008

                      JUDGMENT

Petitioner is the owner of a property having an

extent of 3 Acres 53 cents in Survey No.351/1 of

Kottathara Village, Mannarkkad Taluk, Palakkad. He

claims to have obtained the same on the strength of

Ext.P3 settlement deed, executed by the petitioner’s

father who in turn derived it from one Kaliyambal, and

thereafter perfected title vide Ext.P2 certificate of

purchase. Ext.P4 is the survey sketch issued by the

Village Officer on the basis of Ext.P3. Petitioner’s

grievance arises from what he terms as reluctance on

the part of the Survey Authorities to survey the

property in terms of the application filed by the

petitioner.

2. Having heard learned Government Pleader also,

writ petition is disposed of directing the second

respondent to further proceed with Ext.P5 application

filed by the petitioner and cause survey of the

W.P.(C).35622/2008
2

property. It is made clear that the Survey Authorities

are only required to survey the property and boundaries

are not empowered to change the physical

characteristics of the property. If there is a dispute as

regards the boundary, parties will have to work it out

before the competent authority. Needful shall be done

by the second respondent within two months from the

date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

V.GIRI,
Judge

mrcs