C.James v. The Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court held that respondents cannot disturb petitioners' usage of a 20 feet road without following due process. Questions of fact regarding encroachment were left for legal proceedings.
What did the court decide?
Respondents directed not to disturb petitioners' usage of the 20 feet road without following due process of law.
What the court decided
W.P.Nos.16129 of 2021 and 21343 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :07.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
W.P Nos.16129 of 2021 & 21343 of 2023 and W.M.P.Nos.17061 of 2021 & 20741, 20742 of 2023
1.Regina Selvam 2.S.Sampath 3.C.James
4.B.Sargunavathy
5.Kurshida Begum
- 6.K.Manimaran
7.S.Gopinath ...Petitioners in W.P.No.21343 of 2023
C.James ...Petitioner in W.P.No.16129 of 2021
Vs.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the respondents can interfere with the petitioners' usage of a 20 feet width road claimed within a pond area without following due process of law.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Regina Selvam
- petitioner
S.Sampath
- petitioner
C.James
- respondent
The Commissioner, Chennai Corporation
- respondent
The Zonal Officer, Chennai Corporation
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court