Survey Result Doesn't Affect Right Acquired Over Property Under Title Deed, Only Conclusive Proof Of Boundary Demarcation: Kerala HC

Justice K. Babu held that title over property can be claimed primarily based on a valid title deed and not with reference to survey demarcation carried by survey authorities.

The court further held that the survey result was conclusive proof for the determination of boundaries in a boundary dispute and not for the determination of title or possession of land.

“The provisions of the Kerala Survey & Boundaries Act and the Rules made thereunder can only be made applicable to the survey of lands as provided in Chapter II of the Act. The survey conducted in this case is not in accordance with the survey process as provided in Chapter II of the Act. It is also trite that the decisions of the survey authorities under Chapter II of the Act will not affect the right and title of the property acquired by a party as per a valid title deed. The right and title to property have to be determined not with reference to the survey demarcation but based on other cogent materials, the primary of which is the title deed. The record of the survey result shall be conclusive proof that the boundaries were determined and recorded therein correctly.”

Factually, the dispute pertained to a property originally owned by one Krishnan Nambiar, which was divided into different plots separated by shallow trenches. The plaintiff approached the Trial Court for declaration of title, fixation of boundary and consequential injunction with respect to a portion of this property ("plaint schedule property"), purchased by him from a legal representative of late Krishnan Nambiar.

It was alleged that the defendants were meddling with the boundaries of the partitioned property. This was resisted by the defendants, who claimed that they were not trespassing into the plaintiff's property and in fact, the plaintiff had not taken possession of the plaint schedule property.

The Trial Court decreed the suit in the plaintiff's favor by declaring title over certain plots of land and directed fixation of the boundary. It also restrained defendants by an order of permanent prohibitory injunction from trespassing upon the plaint property. The First Appellate Court upheld the Trial Court's order against which the defendants preferred second appeal before the High Court.

The High Court held that the Trial Court had rightly observed that the defendants have not claimed title based on any document other than the partition deed. It rejected the contention of the defendants based on Rule 56 of Kerala Survey and Boundaries Rules on the basis that the decision of survey authorities was inapplicable when parties acquired land by a valid title deed.

The court further noted that in the present case, the survey was not conducted as per the survey process mentioned in the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act.

Thus, it was concluded that the plaintiff proved his title over the property and the defendants failed to establish their title over the disputed land. Accordingly, the second appeal was dismissed.

Counsels for appellants: Advocates KV Sohan and Sreeja Sohan K

Counsels for respondents: Advocates Jayanandan Madayi Puthiyaveettil and KV Pavithran

Case Title: Elambilan Nani Amma and Ors. v. Mulavana Antony and Ors., RSA NO. 420/2007

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Ker) 698

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment