N. Thasaratha Perumal v. the District Collector
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged an eviction notice via writ petition. All parties agreed the underlying dispute must be decided independently by the civil court. Court held no adjudication was needed in the writ petition and closed it.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was closed with no costs.
What the court decided
W.P(MD)No.20083 of 2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.20083 of 2015 and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2015
N.Thasaratha Perumal
... Petitioner
vs.
- 1.The District Collector, Virudhunagar District, Virudhunagar.
- 2.The Sub Collector / Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging an eviction notice can be decided when the parties agree to decide the dispute independently in a pending civil suit.
Whether the eviction notice requires judicial interference given the availability of civil remedies.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N. Thasaratha Perumal
- respondent
The District Collector, Virudhunagar District
- respondent
The Sub Collector / Revenue Divisional Officer, Sivakasi
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Srivilliputtur Taluk
- respondent
Jeyachandran
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court