Writ petition filed seeking Mandamus to restrain respondents from interfering with petitioner's property possession was dismissed for default due to non-appearance of the petitioners on the date of hearing, resulting in the vacation of the interim order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:05.12.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATRUGHANA PUJAHARI
WP No.24893 of 2017
and WMP Nos.26279 & 26280 of 2017
1. Padmajothi
2. T.Baskaran ..Petitioners
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
Kancheepuram
2. The Assistant Collector ,
Highways Department,
(Building and Maintenance)
Tambaram Division,
Velacherry, Chennai – 600 042.
3. The Tahsildar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
Kanchipuram District.
4. The Revenue Inspector,
No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Road,
OMR, Sholinganallur,
Chennai – 600 119. ..Respondents
2
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from in any manner interfering or disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the petitioner in the schedule mentioned property except due process of law.
For petitioners : No Appearance
For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]
The writ petition has been filed for the relief of Mandamus
forbearing the respondents from any manner interfering or disturbing the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the schedule mentioned property of the petitioners.
3
has been demolished and therefore, this Court was inclined to grant an order of stay of dispossession till 07.11.017 and also made it clear that till such time, the writ petitioners shall not create any third party right in respect of the land-in-possession or alter the physical feature of the same and again, the writ petition was listed on 07.11.2017 and on that day, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners have filed the memo stating that despite a registered notice was sent to the petitioners, calling upon them to give instructions but it is returned with an endorsement “unclaimed” and therefore, he reported no instructions and the said memo was taken on record. The Registry was directed to find out as to weather any other counsel has entered appearance on behalf of the petitioner, if so print the name of the counsel or print the name of the petitioners and directed to list the matter on 13.11.2017 "for orders".
4
petitioners 1 and 2 appear in the cause list, there is no representation on their behalf and their names were called thrice and despite that there is no representation on their behalf and therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed for default and the interim order granted by this Court is vacated. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMPs are also closed.
[M.S.N.,J] [S.P.I., J]
05.12.2017
Index : No
Internet : Yes
kv/rka
To
1. The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
Kancheepuram
2. The Assistant Collector ,
Highways Department,
(Building and Maintenance)
Tambaram Division,
Velacherry, Chennai – 600 042.
3. The Tahsildar,
Sholinganallur Taluk,
Kanchipuram District.
4. The Revenue Inspector,
No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Road,
OMR, Sholinganallur,
Chennai – 600 119.
5
M.SATHYANARAYANAN.,J, and SATRUGHANA PUJAHARI.,J,
kv/rka
WP No.24893 of 2017
05.12.2017
Padmajothi
T.Baskaran
The District Collector, Kancheepuram District
The Assistant Collector, Highways Department
The Tahsildar, Sholinganallur Taluk
The Revenue Inspector, Chennai
M.SATHYANARAYANAN
SATRUGHANA PUJAHARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
