Dismissed

Jamila Barisha v. The District Collector

Madras HC19 Dec 2022WP(MD)/14013/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition challenging retail vending of a TASMAC shop situated on the petitioner's property. The court referred to a Supreme Court decision cautioning against deciding disputed factual issues regarding property rights in summary proceedings. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the civil court, which was granted, leading to the dismissal

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to approach the civil court was allowed; connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Jamila Barisha Vs The District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.12.2022

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU

¶6

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD)No. 9999 of 2022

Jamila Barisha

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar.

¶11

2.Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Department of Prohibition and Excise, Collectorate Complex, Virudhunagar.

¶12

3.The Manager, Tasmac, Virudhunagar.

¶13

4.Macharaja

¶14

... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to stop the

¶16

1/5

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶19

retail vending of TASMAC shop (in shop No.11911) situated at the petitioner's property in Plot No.25, Door No.41, Melapettai Street, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar Town, Virudhunagar District and to hand over the key to the petitioner by considering the petitioner's representations dated 10.06.2022 and 16.06.2022.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Seenu Ramachandran For R-1 to R-2 : Mr. P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For R3 : Mr. H.Arumugam Standing Counsel

¶21

ORDER

¶22

Heard Mr. K.Seenu Ramachandran, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. P.Subbaraj, Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the First and Second Respondents and Mr. H.Arumugam, Learned Counsel for the Third Respondent and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

¶23

2/5

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶26

The Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition for directing the First and Second Respondents to stop the retail vending of TASMAC shop No.11911 located at his property in Plot No.25, Door No.41, Melapettai Street, Madurai Road, Virudhunagar Town, Virudhunagar District and to hand over the key to the Petitioner by considering his representations dated 10.06.2022 and 16.06.2022.

¶27

Having regard to the nature of the aforesaid relief sought, it must be pointed out that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the decision in Roshina T -vs- Abul Azeez K.T. [(2019) 2 SCC 329], has cautioned against determining disputed questions of fact relating to property rights in proceedings following summary procedure under Article 226 of the Constitution and that the same would have to be answered one way or the other only in a properly framed suit impleading necessary parties before the civil court. In view of the aforesaid legal position, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to resort to the aforesaid procedure. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.

¶28

3/5

¶29

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶31

In fine, the Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn granting such

¶32

liberty. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶33

19.12.2022

¶34

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Sm

¶35

Note: Issue order copy by 26.12.2022 TO:

¶36

1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar.

¶37

2.Assistant Commissioner of Excise, Department of Prohibition and Excise, Collectorate Complex, Virudhunagar.

¶38

3.The Manager, Tasmac, Virudhunagar.

¶39

4/5

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶42

P.D.AUDIKESAVALU,J.

¶43

¶44

W.P. (MD) No. 14013 of 2022

¶45

19.12.2022

¶46

5/5

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jamila Barisha v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamila Barisha 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Sivakumar, Vs the Commissioner

M.K.Palani Asari Vs the Dist. Collector

The Fit Person Vs R. Arumugam

Kanagambal @ Kanaga.D Vs The Commissioner

M/s Sierra Engineering and Vs The State Tax Officer (Intelligence)

P.Muthukumarsamy Vs the District Manager