Old Deed, New Fence: Resolving a Cadastral Boundary on a Tea Smallholding
You are instructed by the owner of Lot 7, a 0.812 ha tea smallholding in Matale District, to survey a two-lot subdivision for sale. The 1957 crown grant describes Lot 7 by adjoining owners and a 12 ft road reserve; the attached plan shows a rectangle with bearings and distances but no coordinates. Only one original concrete boundary post survives, at the road corner. The present owner's fence on the eastern side stands 4.5 m inside the neighbouring Lot 8, which is held under a permit. The neighbour has cultivated the strip for about 18 years and says the fence is the boundary. A 1992 aerial photograph shows a fence line close to the present fence, but the old plan line is visible as a track. The client wants the subdivision plan to follow the fence so that the sale can proceed quickly, and asks you not to 'create a dispute'. The total area within the old deed lines is about 0.812 ha; the fenced area is 0.775 ha. You have the old plan, the grant, and a recent survey of Lot 8 that also shows the 4.5 m discrepancy.
1. Which evidence should control the eastern boundary, and how should the 4.5 m occupation discrepancy be shown on the subdivision plan?
Read the worked answer
A surveyor locates boundaries; the surveyor does not adjudicate title. In cadastral reconstruction the usual order of evidence is: original boundary marks or monuments; the original plan geometry (bearings and distances, tied to surviving marks); areas as a check; and occupation such as fences as supporting evidence, not as an automatic replacement for the deed line.
Here only one original post survives. Use it with the 1957 plan and the recent Lot 8 survey to reconstruct the common line. Check whether the old plan dimensions close and whether the Lot 8 survey used the same original corner. The 1992 air photo supports the deed line being east of the present fence. The neighbour's 18 years of cultivation may support a legal claim, but that is a matter for advice under the Prescription Ordinance and possibly the courts; it does not authorise the surveyor to move the deed boundary unilaterally.
The plan should show the deed/plan line as the subdivision boundary and show the fence as an occupation or discrepancy line, with a note giving the 4.5 m offset and the area difference. The discrepancy should not be omitted. If the parties later agree on a boundary, the surveyor can survey the agreed line, but the basis and consents must be recorded.
2. The client instructs you to sign the plan showing the fence as the boundary and to omit the discrepancy. How should you respond professionally?
Read the worked answer
Refuse to certify a plan that knowingly suppresses a material boundary discrepancy. A licensed surveyor's plan is relied on by the client, the neighbour, the Land Registry and later purchasers; signing a misleading plan is not a favour to the client. Explain in writing that you can survey the deed line and show occupation, or you can survey an agreed line if the neighbour gives informed written consent after legal advice, but you cannot simply relabel the fence as the deed boundary.
Set out practical options: (1) issue the plan on the deed line with the occupation line and discrepancy noted; (2) if the client wishes to sell only the fenced area, obtain a proper boundary agreement or legal determination and then survey that line with the agreement referenced; (3) if the neighbour disputes, refer the matter to the client's lawyer and the relevant land registry or Survey Department process. Keep the field notes, correspondence and instructions. Do not accept pressure to backdate or alter observations.
3. The fenced area is 0.775 ha and the deed area is 0.812 ha. What does this tell you, and what area should appear on the plan?
Read the worked answer
The difference is 0.037 ha, or 370 m², about 4.6% of the deed area. A 4.5 m wide strip running roughly 82 m along the eastern side would account for about 369 m², which is consistent with the reported offset. Area is the weakest boundary evidence: it is a check, not a licence to shift lines. The area difference supports the conclusion that a real strip is in dispute, not that the fence must be correct.
The plan should state the area computed from the adopted boundary. If the deed line is adopted, the subdivision lots should be computed from that line and the plan should note the occupied area and the discrepancy separately. If an agreed line is adopted, the plan should state the basis of the line and the agreed area. The client should be told that the sale area will differ depending on which line is legally established.