Disposed

Ashwath Raja.P v. The Commissioner

Madras HC6 Jan 2023WP(MD)/317/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two petitioners approached the Madras High Court via Writ Petition seeking a mandatory order to restrain the second respondent from constructing unauthorized buildings in a property where the petitioner claims ownership and has a pending partition suit.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was disposed of and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed with no costs awarded to either party.

Ashwath Raja.P Vs The Commissioner — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.01.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR and

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶7

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023 and W.M.P.(MD)No.314 of 2023

¶8

1.P.Ashwath Raja 2.Mrs.Jayashree Shyam Shankar

¶9

... Petitioners

¶10

Vs.

¶11

1.The Commissioner, Rajapalayam Municipality, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District - 626 117.

¶12

2.T.V.Alagar Raja ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the official respondents to forbear the 2^nd respondent from putting up any unauthorized construction in the subject property measuring 23 cents in T.S.No.58 and 31.75 cents in T.S.No.55 in Block

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶17

No.7 in Ward C corresponding to old Revenue Survey Number 297 in Dharmapuram, Pappu Raja Street, Rajapalayam without obtaining any planning permission from 1^st respondent Municipality or from any other statutory authority.

¶18

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ramesh

¶19

For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar, Standing Counsel for R1

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

[Order of the Court was made by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.]

¶22

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the official respondents to forbear the 2^nd respondent from putting up any unauthorized construction in the subject property measuring 23 cents in T.S.No.58 and 31.75 cents in T.S.No.55 in Block No.7 in Ward C corresponding

¶23

to old Revenue Survey Number 297 in Dharmapuram, Pappu Raja Street, Rajapalayam without obtaining any planning permission from the 1^st respondent Municipality or from any other statutory authority.

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

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

¶26

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶28

2 . Heard Mr.S.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶29

Mr.N.Dilipkumar, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice for the first respondent. Considering the nature of the order proposed to be passed in this Writ Petition, notice to the 2^nd respondent is dispensed with.

¶30

3 . By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶31

4 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first petitioner

¶32

is the power agent of the second writ petitioner and the petitioners' mother has filed a suit in O.S.No.79 of 2018 before the District Court, Virudhunagar District for partition and the consequential relief of permanent injunction. The said suit was dismissed for default and the petitioners have filed an application for restoration of the said suit. He further submitted that taking advantage of the dismissal of the suit, the 2^nd respondent is attempting to put up construction in the subject property. Hence, the petitioner made a representation 0n 06.11.2022, seeking for action to remove the unauthorised construction of the building in the

¶33

_____________ Page 3 of 6_

¶34

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

¶35

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶36

aforesaid subject matter of property. But, till date no action has been taken by the respondents for removal of the said unauthorised construction. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶37

5 . The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that the second respondent has not filed any application for construction of the building, but he has constructed only a temporary shed for vehicle parking. He further submitted that if any illegal construction is made by the second respondent, the first respondent will take necessary action for removal of the same.

¶38

6. Recording the aforesaid submission, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

[D.K.K., J.] [R.V., J.]

¶40

06.01.2023 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No vsm

¶41

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶44

¶45

The Commissioner, Rajapalayam Municipality, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District 626 117.

¶46

Page 5 of 6

¶47

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

¶48

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶49

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. and R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

¶50

vsm

¶51

W.P.(MD) No.317 of 2023

¶52

06.01.2023

¶53

_____________ Page 6 of 6_

¶54

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

Ashwath Raja.P v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashwath Raja.P v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mathiyalagan Vs The District Collector

Angalaeswari.R Vs The District Collector

M/s.Ksm Leather Exports Vs The Authorized Officer / Assistant General Manager

Suresh Kumar Vs The District Collector

Sri Krishnan Vs The District Collector

Thirunavukarasu Vs The District Collector