The Court disposed of a sub-application to reopen a contempt petition. It observed that while some encroachment was removed, a new thatched house appeared. The Court declined interference and directed authorities to remain vigilant.
The sub-application to reopen the contempt petition was disposed of without interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Tuesday, the Twenty First day of November Two Thousand and Twenty Three
PRESENT
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND
The Hon'ble Mrs.Justice L. VICTORIA GOWRI
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023 in CONT P(MD).NO.183 OF 2023
S. Senthil Kumar S/o.Sathappan 167 P.Nerpugapatti Paganeri ( Post ) Karaikudi Taluk Sivagangai District.
... Appellant/Petitioner/Petitioner Vs Mrs.Diravida Mani Nallathambi The President P.Nerpugapatti Paganeri( Post ) Karaikudi Taluk Sivagangai District ... Respondent/contemnor/Respondent
Prayer in SUB A(MD)No.183 of 2020 :-
This Petition is filed Under Section 151 of CPC.,To reopon the Contempt petition in Cont.P(MD).No.183/2023 dated 09.02.2023
Prayer in Contempt Petition (MD).No.183 of 2023:-
This Contempt Petition is filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act,to punish the contemnor/ Respondent No.4 for his wilful disobdience of the order https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis dated 08.11.2022 passed by this Honourable Court in WP(MD).No.366 of 2022.
1/5
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
Prayer in WP(MD)No.366 of 2022 :-
This Writ Petition is filed Under Article 226 of the contitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the 4th respondent to take necessary steps to remove the encroachment made by the 5th respondent to 7th respondent in S.No.541/1 of P.Nerpugapatti,.Paganeri Post, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District by considering the petitioners representation dated 04.12.2020.
ORDER:- This Sub Application Petition is coming on for orders on this day and upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/s.S.Rabeek Raja, Advocate for the Petitioner and of M/s.S.P.Maharajan, Spl Govt Pleader, for the respondent, this Court made the following order:
“This sub application is filed to reopen the contempt petition in Cont.P.(MD) No.183 of 2023 filed by the petitioner.
2. This Court, by order dated 08.11.2022 in W.P.(MD) No.366 of 2022, directed the authority concerned to remove the encroachments in the subject land in entirety. Since the said order has not been complied with, the petitioner filed Cont.P.(MD) No.183 of 2023 seeking to punish the respondent for his will disobedience of the orders passed by this Court.
3. On 09.02.2023, when the contempt petition came up for hearing, learned Government Pleader submitted that the order of this Court had been complied with and four encroachments had been removed on 16.09.2022 by
following the procedures as contemplated under the Tamil Nadu Land https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/5
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
Encroachment Act, 1905 and to that effect, the learned Government Pleader also produced a copy of the proceedings of the Tahsildar, Karaikudi, dated 23.09.2022, before this Court and recording the same, this Court closed the contempt petition.
4. Alleging that the encroachments have not been removed fully, the petitioner has filed this sub application seeking to reopen the contempt petition.
5. We have perused the photographs produced by the petitioner, which show that the compound wall and some of the encroachments had already been removed. One thatched house has been put up by some other person and except the same, there is no permanent compound wall constructed in the subject land. Thus, we are not inclined to interfere with the proceedings already issued directing removal of encroachments.
6. The authorities are expected to be vigilant while maintaining the public streets. At the time of putting up any permanent construction or compound wall, the authorities competent must conduct inspection and if any encroachments are identified, actions are to be initiated immediately to remove the encroachments. At the outset, the respondent shall prevent any further encroachments in that locality by following the procedures as contemplated. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/5
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
7. With the above observations, this sub application is disposed of.”
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-I)
// True Copy //
/12/2023 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )
krk
TO
1.The President, P.Nerpugapatti , Paganeri( Post ), Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District.
ORDER DATED : 21/11/2023
==========================
ORDER
==========================
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
IN CONT.P(MD)NO.183 OF 2023 Giving direction and etc. as stated within...
4/5
SUB A(MD). No.210 of 2023
AMS/08.12.2023 5 P 3C
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court is issuing certified copies in this format from 17/07/2023
5/5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to interfere with the contempt proceedings already closed due to partial compliance by authorities.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
S. Senthil Kumar
Mrs.Diravida Mani Nallathambi
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
L. VICTORIA GOWRI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
