Dismissed

P.Subramani v. the Commissioner of Police

Madras HC18 Jan 2018WP/18638/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge order dismissing a writ petition seeking mandamus to restrain police from interfering in a property dispute. The court held that title and possession issues are for the Civil Court, and writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised in absence of established rights.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed. No order as to costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

P.Subramani Vs the Commissioner of Police — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :18.01.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶5

W.P.No.18638 of 2007 and

¶6

M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2007

¶7

P.Subramani ..Petitioner vs 1.The Commissioner of Police, Chennai City, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008. 2.The Inspector of Police, Madipakkam Police Station, Madipakkam, Chennai – 600 091. 3.Vilayanur Subramanian Ravi .. Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 2^nd respondent police or their subordinates from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated at Madipakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District comprised in S.No.213/3 (New Survey No.213/3A) since it is a civil dispute.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ilayaperumal For Respondent : Mr.E.Manoharan Additional Government Pleader for R1 & R2 No Appearance for R3

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

The relief sought for in this writ petition is to forbear the 2^nd respondent police or their subordinates from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated at Madipakkam Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District comprised in S.No.213/3 (New Survey No.213/3A) since it is a civil dispute.

¶11

2.The relief as such sought for requires no further consideration in view of the fact that the petitioner claimed

¶12

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

¶13

ownership of the property,and it is for him to establish the same before the competent Civil Court. In respect of the relief sought for against the 2^nd respondent, it is clarified that in respect of the title of the property, there cannot be any say by the 2^nd repondent. However, if any law and order problem is created by the parties on account of the property dispute, then the police will have the jurisdiction to register the case, if it is found that an offence has been committed under the criminal law. In respect of the title and possession, it is for the respective parties to approach the appropriate Civil Court and the relief as such sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted in the absence of establishing the rights of the parties before the competent Civil Court.

¶14

3.Thus, no further adjudication needs to be undertaken in
respect of the grounds raised in this writ petition.
Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
kak
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Chennai City,
Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Madipakkam Police Station,
Madipakkam,
Chennai – 600 091.
+1 CC to Mr.A. Ilayaperumal, Advocate sr 4223.
W.P.No.18638 of 2007
KK(CO)
SP(09/02/2018)

¶15

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

P.Subramani v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Subramani v. the Commissioner of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

E.Mahalingam (59) Vs the Secretary to Govt.

Tamilnadu Agricultural Vs State of Tamilnadu Rep. by

Sundara Udayakumar Vs the District Collector

Smt.S.Vasantha Vs the Chairman

A.Sathiyabama Vs State of Tamilnadu

S.Shyamala Vs Niranjan Mardi, IAS