Allowed

G. Varadan, v. The Assistant Engineer

Madras HC13 Aug 2015WP/24977/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court directed the respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioner within three weeks, holding that a co-owner in lawful possession is entitled to a domestic connection regardless of an objection raised by another co-owner.

What did the court decide?

The respondent is directed to give electricity connection to the petitioner within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

G. Varadan, Vs The Assistant Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 13.08.2015

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN

W.P.No.24977 of 2015

G.Varadan

... Petitioner

vs.

The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chekkadu Division, Avadi, Chennai, Tamil Nadu. ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to provide an electricity connection to the petitioner for his residential house bearing Survey No.192, Door No.14/28, Varadapuri Amman Koil Street, Sekkadu Village, Chennai – 600 071, Tamil Nadu, within a stipulated time.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.P.Thiruneelakandan For Respondent : Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar ORDER

¶12

The petitioner contends that he is residing at Door No.14/28, Varadapuri Amman Koil Street, Sekkadu Village, Chennai – 600 071 comprised in Survey No.192 and the said property is his ancestral property. He alongwith his father and other uncles are entitled to share in the property. Since there was a partition, the petitioner has been allotted a portion of the property and he seeks electricity connection for his allotted portion of the property. Though the petitioner has applied for electricity connection on 19.06.2015, so far, the electricity connection has not been given to his property and hence he is before this court by way of this writ petition.

¶13

Heard Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶14

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner's uncle's son one Mr.Palani has objected

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

for giving electricity connection to the petitioner's property and therefore the connection could not be given and he is the necessary party. The said contention of the learned counsel for the respondent is liable to be rejected as long as the petitioner is one of the coowner of the property and remains in lawful possession, he is entitled to domestic electricity connection. Therefore, the respondent is directed to give electricity connection to the petitioner based on his representation dated 19.06.2015, as per law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶17

The writ petition is disposed of with above direction. No costs. Sd/Asst.Registrar (CO) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar rgr To The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chekkadu Division, Avadi, Chennai, Tamil Nadu. +1 cc to Mr.P.R.Thiruneelakandan, Advocate, sr.42321 +1 cc to Mr.P.R.Dhilipkumar, Advocate, sr.42377 W.P.No.24977 of 2015 km(co) kra(2/9)

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

G. Varadan, v. The Assistant Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. Varadan, v. The Assistant Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Selvi Radhakrishnan, Vs The District Collector cum

S.Sivakumar, Vs The Commissioner

N.Kothandaraman Vs The Chairman

N.P.Suresh, Vs the District Collector

S.Venkataraman, Vs The Junior Engineer

Shanthi Vs the Government of Tamilnadu