Disposed

R.Malairajan, v. the Supdt. of Police

Madras HC2 Mar 2017WP(MD)/3696/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court entertained a writ petition seeking a direction to police respondents not to interfere with the petitioner's civil rights over a common pathway-lane. Upon the respondent representatives stating there is no interference or intention to interfere, the petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

No direction granted; the petition and connected miscellaneous petition are closed.

R.Malairajan, Vs the Supdt. of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.03.2017 CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

W.P(MD)No.3696 of 2013 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013

¶6

R.Malairajan ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶9

2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai Range, Sivagangai District.

¶10

3.Mohan

¶11

4.Sivananda Prabu ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 and their subordinate officials from interfering with the petitioner's civil rights of using the common pathway-lane in Survey Number 186/19 in Thirupachethi North Village, presently, Thirupuvanam Taluk, Sivagangai District as already settled by a competent civil Court.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagathevan Special Govt. Pleader for R.1 & R.2

¶15

Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan for R.3 & R.4

¶16

****** ORDER

¶17

Apprehending that the respondents 1 and 2 are interfering with the civil disputes of the petitioner and the respondents 3 and 4 and coercing the petitioner, the present writ petition has been filed for a direction to forbear the respondents 1 and 2 from interfering with the petitioner's civil rights.

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. Mr.M.Alagathevan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, on instructions, submitted that the respondents 1 and 2 had never interfered into the

¶19

¶20

petitioner's civil rights and they have no such intention to interfere with the petitioner's civil rights in future also.

¶21

Recording the statements of the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, which are made on the instructions of the respondents 1 and 2, this writ petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶22

SdAssistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/

¶23

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

1.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 2.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Manamadurai Range, Sivagangai District. +One cc to Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy, Advocate,SR.No.12204 +One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.12277 +One cc to Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan, Advocate, SR.No.12025 rsb RL/6C/2P/PM/10.3.2017

¶26

W.P(MD)No.3696 of	2013
	and
M.P(MD)No.1 of	2013
02.03.	2017

¶27

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

R.Malairajan, v. the Supdt. of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Malairajan, v. the Supdt. of Police

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

Rahim Brothers Middle School, Vs the District Elementary

Rml.Mani Vs the District Collector

M. Kalyani, Vs State of Tamil Nadu

The Church of South India Vs the Secretary

R.Banumathi Vs the District Collector

S. Sekar, Vs the Secretary to the