Dismissed

M.R.Murali, (Deceased) v. The Commissioner of

Madras HC15 Sept 2023WP/9688/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition seeking quashing of proceedings and removal of lock and seal on disputed property was dismissed as not pressed. The Court relied on a petitioner's memo stating that pending title litigation in a suit and C.R.P. should be the appropriate forum to resolve the dispute.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as not pressed in view of pending litigation regarding the same property; order closed.

M.R.Murali, (Deceased) Vs The Commissioner of — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 15.09.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE Mrs.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶6

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.No.11596 of 2018

¶9

M.R.Murali (Deceased)

¶10

M.R.Krishna Kumari D/o Late M.B.Ramachandra Naidu

¶11

(P2 substituted as LR of deceased Sole Petitioner vide order dated 11.08.2023 made in W.M.P.No.23037/2023 in W.P.No.9688/2018 by JNBJ & NMJ)

¶12

... Petitioners

¶13

¶14

The Commissioner of Corporation, Ribbon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

¶15

The Assistant Commissioner Land and Estate, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶16

The Executive Engineer, Zone 5, Ward 57, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶17

..Respondents

¶18

1/4

¶19

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

¶20

Prayer:

¶21

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶22

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶23

India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in their proceedings No.NI.MA.U.THU.NA.KA.No. LE4/5227/2000 dated 19.03.2018 and quash the same and direct the respondent to remove the lock and seal.

¶24

For Petitioners : Ms.Thenmozhi Shivaperumal For Respondents : Mr.E.C.Ramesh, Standing Counsel for R1 No appearance for R2 & R3.

¶25

O R D E R

¶26

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order dated

¶27

19.03.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent and to direct the respondents to remove the lock and seal.

¶28

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the dispute in respect of the same property, a suit in O.S.No.6630/2019 and Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P.No.4123/2022 are pending. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also filed a memo dated 14.09.2023 which reads as follows:

¶29

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶30

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶31

In view of subsequent pending litigation between Chennai Corporation and the petitioner in the above writ petition No.9688/2018 pertaining to same property Door No.244 & 264, Walltax Road, regarding the disputes of title in O.S.6630/2019 filed by Chennai Corporation and C.R.P.No.4123/2022 initiated against the Corporation by the petitioner in the above W.P., this Hon'ble Court may dispose the above W.P. to work out the remedy by the writ petitioner in the above pending suit 6630/2019 and CRP No.4123/2022 and render justice.

¶32

Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner will work out her remedy in the above suit. Recording the above memo filed by the petitioner, this Writ Petition stands dismissed as not

¶33

pressed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

(J.N.B.,J.) (N.M.,J.) 15.09.2023

¶35

Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vsi

¶36

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶37

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶38

J.NISHA BANU,J. and N.MALA,J.

¶39

vsi

¶40

¶41

The Commissioner of Corporation, Ribbon Building, Chennai - 600 003.

¶42

The Assistant Commissioner Land and Estate, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶43

The Executive Engineer, Zone 5, Ward 57, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

¶44

W.P.No.9688 of 2018

¶45

15.09.2023

¶46

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

M.R.Murali, (Deceased) v. The Commissioner of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.R.Murali, (Deceased) v. The Commissioner of

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

M/s.Kishore kumar Gokaldas HUF Vs the Secretary to Government

M.S.Abul Hasan, Vs The Secretary to Government

S.S.Ads Vs The District Collector

Future Gaming and Hotel Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs India G6 Hospitality Ip Llc

The Commissioner Vs National Green Tribunal

P.Rajesh Vs The Member secretary