Dismissed

V.Chellamuthu v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC25 Jan 2022WP(MD)/14376/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to restrain police officers from interfering with his peaceful possession of a property, alleging forceful eviction amidst pending civil suits. The Court noted an undertaking by parties to resolve the matter in civil courts. It disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to workout his remedy before the appropriate Civil Court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to workout remedy before the appropriate Civil Court. Writ petition dismissed.

V.Chellamuthu Vs the Superintendent of Police — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.14376 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 25.01.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN W.P.(MD).No.14376 of 2019 and W.M.P. (MD) No. 10798 of 2019

V.Chellamuthu

... Petitioner

-Vs-

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

¶10

2.The Inspector of Police, Palani Taluk Police Station, Neikkarappatti,

Dindigul District.

3.K.Rajendran,

4.Kanagaraj

5.Inspector of Police, Neikkarapatti Police Station, Dindigul District.

¶15

6.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Palani Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District. ... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents No.2 to 6 from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the properties comprised in Survey No.72/2 to an extent of 2.64 cents, Survey No.72/3 to an extent 0.46 cents and Survey No.68/3 to an extent of 0.01 cent situated at Balasamuthiram village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sadeskumar

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar

¶19

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶20

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

¶21

1/3

¶22

W.P.(MD).No.14376 of 2019

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This writ petition is filed seeking Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents 2 to 6 restraining from interfering the petitioners peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property at Balasamuthiram Village, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶25

2.According to the writ petitioner, there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent in respect of the said property and a suit for specific performance in O.S.No.91 of 2002 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Palani, was decreed ex-parte in favour of the third respondent. Subsequently, the petitioner had filed a permanent injunction suit in O.S.No.83 of 2009 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Palani. In turn, the third respondent has filed O.S.No.55 of 2012 before the same Court for injunction. It is contended by the petitioner that when several suits are pending regarding the title and possession of the property, the respondent police interfering the dispute and trying to forcefully evict the petitioner from the disputed property.

¶26

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor states that based on the complaint given by the petitioner, the police registered C.S.R.No.250 of 2019 and enquired the parties and the parties have given an undertaking that they will workout the remedy before the Civil Court and based on that undertaking, the complaint has been closed and the police is not interfering in the civil dispute as alleged in this petition.

¶27

Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the petitioner to workout his remedy before the appropriate Civil Court. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶28

Assistant Registrar (CRL side)

¶29

// True Copy //

¶30

pnn

¶31

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

¶32

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

¶33

2/3

¶34

W.P.(MD).No.14376 of 2019

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

2.The Inspector of Police, Palani Taluk Police Station, Neikkarappatti, Dindigul District.

¶38

3.The Inspector of Police, Neikkarapatti Police Station, Dindigul District.

¶39

4.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Palani Taluk Police Station, Dindigul District.

¶40

5.The Additional Public Prosecutore, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶41

W.P.(MD).No.14376 of 2019

¶42

and W.M.P. (MD) No. 10798 of 2019

¶43

RD(04.02.2022) 3P 6C

¶44

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

¶45

3/3

V.Chellamuthu v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Chellamuthu v. the Superintendent 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

Raja @ Rajapandi, Vs the Revenue Divisional

Mohamed Kaniyammal, Vs the Principal Secretary to

G.Mariyammal, Vs the Principal Secretary to the

S.Paulraj Vs the Director General of

S.Emmanuel Arun Kumar, Vs the Director General of

Chellavadivu Vs the Superintendent of Police