PRODATTUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Vs. GURNAM HANUMANTHU
LAWS(MAD)-1953-4-21
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Decided on April 06,1953

PRODATTUR MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE Appellant
VERSUS
GURNAM HANUMANTHU Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Ramaswami, J. - (1.) This is a batch of civil revision petitions which have been filed against the order made by the District Munsif of Prodattur that the Collector is neither a necessary nor a proper party in several suits in which he was sought to be impleaded as a party-defendant.
(2.) The suits have been filed by certain residents of Prodattur against the Prodattur Municipality which has booked them in regard to certain encroachments on road margins as per survey under the Madras Survey and Boundaries Act. These residents have filed these suits for declaration of their title in respect of those lands forming the subject-matter of encroachment and eviction notices and for an injunction against the Municipality from disturbing their possession. The Municipality contended that these properties were vested in the municipality only for municipal purposes and that the grant of a declaration of title to the plaintiffs materially affects the right of the real owner, the Government, and that the Government would therefore be a necessary party. It is further urged that even if the suit is one under Section 14 of the Survey and Boundaries Act, inasmuch as the suits are between private persons and the Municipality who holds the suit property with a limited interest therein subject to the control of the Government, the real owner, the suite are bad for non-joinder of the necessary party, viz., the Government. I may point out here that this contention is supported by the Government.
(3.) The lower Court invoking the decisions in --'Secretary of State v. Malraju Venkatanarasimha Rao', AIR 1940 Mad 620 (A) and -- 'Appalanarasimha v. Commissioner, Municipal Council Vizagapatam', AIR 1945 Mad 224 (B) to the facts of this case and refusing to apply the decision in -- 'Krishnaswami Naidu v. Municipal Council, Bellary', AIR 1937 Mad 641 (C) held that the Government represented by the Collector was not a necessary party in these suits for declarations and injunction and dismissed the contentions of the municipality. Hence these civil revision petitions.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.