LI Network
Published on: October 17, 2023 at 11:27 IST
In the case of P. Ganesan v. The Commissioner, Madurai City Municipal Corporation, the Madras High Court has ruled that a litigant must seek recourse in a competent civil court to establish their case in a title dispute.
The petitioner in this case had sought to quash a notice issued by the Commissioner of the Madurai Corporation regarding the removal of encroachments.
The High Court, while dismissing the petition, granted the petitioner the liberty to approach the appropriate civil court if they claimed title over the subject property, as the matter required the securitization of documents and original evidence, which cannot be adjudicated in a writ proceeding.
The Division Bench comprising Justice S. M. Subramaniam and Justice V. Lakshminarayanan emphasized that the High Court cannot engage in a roving enquiry, especially when a title dispute is raised. The petitioner was directed to approach the competent civil court for the purpose of establishing their case.
The petitioner’s contention was that the subject property belonged entirely to their mother, and they had inherited it through a settlement in 2008. However, the Commissioner had issued a notice treating the petitioner as an encroacher, which led to the legal proceedings.
The High Court’s decision was based on the fact that the petitioner had approached the wrong court for the matter at hand. Therefore, the petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was instructed to pursue their case in the appropriate civil court for resolution.
This case underscores the importance of approaching the right legal forum when dealing with title disputes, as the High Court clarified that such disputes necessitate adjudication in a competent civil court rather than through writ proceedings.