M.THANIKACHALAM, J. - (1.) The opposite parties are the appellants.
(2.) The complainant/ respondent acquired ownership in Survey No.260/11, two scents, by virtue of sale deed dt.2.11.92. In the same survey No., the maternal uncle Malaikani, had purchased two scents, and purchased a house, and one Chokalingam unable to pay the loan, left the village, executing a power deed. In the year 1995, joint patta was issued in favour of Chockalingam, and the complainant, and therefore the complainant sought the subdivision by paying a sum of Rs.80/- on 7.2.2004. On 5.12.2007, when the complainant sought for FMB, he was informed to pay survey fee, in order to measure the property, which was also paid on 28.1.2008. But demanding Rs.1000/-, the surveyor by name Kasinathan, refused to measure the property, requesting the sale deed from Chockalingam. Thus having collected the amount, for measuring the property, not performing their duty, the opposite parties have committed deficiency, for which the complainant is entitled to a sum of Rs.95000/-, and other appropriate relief.
(3.) The opposite parties, admitting the availability of the Survey No. and total extent therein, its extent, as well as the sub divisions 260/A,B,C, resisted the case, further contending that S.No.260/11C 0.01.0 belongs to one Manoranjitham, that survey No.260/11C, 260/11C1, 260/11C-2, measures 0.00.70, stands in the name of Chockalingam, Malairaja, jointly, and at the time of updating patta, it was not divided, and the title between the parties, have to be decided before measuring the property, and therefore as such, since there is a dispute between Chockalingam and complainant, as per the documents the property was measured, and if the complainant felt the area available for him is less, he ought to have approached the appropriate court, and settled the matter, and not to file the case before the consumer forum, since the case itself is not maintainable, thereby praying for the dismissal of the complaint.;