Dismissed

Vijayalakshmi v. the District Collector

Madras HC1 Aug 2019WP/25331/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a writ of mandamus to restrain respondents from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession of property at S.No.704, Hosur. The court held that the remedy lies before the executing court regarding the Civil Court decree, making the writ petition not maintainable. The petition was dismissed. No costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for her remedy. No costs awarded.

Vijayalakshmi Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 01.08.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

¶5

W.P.No.25331 of 2010

¶6

Vijayalakshmi
Rep. by her power of attorney
K.Guruswamy ...Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Collector,
Krishnagiri.
2. The Tasildhar,
Taluk Office, House. ..Respondents

¶7

Prayer:- The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situate at S.No.704, Hosur, Krishnagiri.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondents : Mr.I.Sathish, AGP ORDER

¶9

Heard the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶10

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property situated at S.No.704, Hosur, Krishnagiri.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the right of the petitioner has been declared by the competent Civil Court in O.S.No.50 of 1996 and the same is also confirmed by the appellate Court in A.S.No.69 of 1998. Despite the same, the respondents are attempting to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the petitioner.

¶12

The learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents would state that if there is any violation of

¶13

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

¶14

the order / Decree of the Civil Court, the remedy of the petitioner is before the Executing Court and on that score, the Writ Petition is not maintainable.

¶15

I find force in the above submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed, with liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent Civil Court for her remedy. No costs.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV)

¶17

//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
pvs
To
1. The District Collector,
Krishnagiri.
2. The Tasildhar,
Taluk Office, House.
+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.66340
+1c to Mr.V.Raghavachari, Advocate Sr.65849
W.P.No.25331 of 2010
ca[co]
srg 25/09/2019

¶18

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

Vijayalakshmi v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayalakshmi v. the District Collector

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

G.Subramanian Vs State of Tamilnadu

Ganpathi Industrial Pvt. Ltd., Vs the Principal Chief Engineer

E.Subathra Vs the Additional Principal

Indian Medicine and Homeopathy Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Instiitute of of Asian Vs Tamilnadu Information

P.S.Shanmugasundaram, Vs the Commissioner