Allowed

Rengasamy v. The Superintending Engineer

Madras HC3 Aug 2023WP(MD)/533/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus directing the Third Respondent to provide an electricity connection to his house. The Court noted the petitioner is the legal owner based on a previous decree and directed the Respondents to grant the connection within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner was directed to submit documents to respondents; respondents were directed to grant electricity connection within four weeks.

Rengasamy Vs The Superintending Engineer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 03.08.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

Rengasamy

... Petitioner

1.The Superintending Engineer,

¶11

Office of the Superintending Engineer,

¶12

Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited,

¶13

Pudukkottai District.

¶14

2.The Divisional Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited,

¶15

Mariyammankovil Street, Gandharvakkottai Post and Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶16

3.The Assistant Engineer, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited,

¶17

Gandharvakkottai North, Mariyammankovil Street, Gandharvakkottai Post and Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

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

¶20

1/5

¶21

PRAYER:

¶22

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶23

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's house property in S.F.No.29/2B, Manjampatti Village, Andanur, Gandharvakkottai Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian For R1 to R3 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan Standing Counsel

¶25

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

This writ petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to provide electricity connection to the petitioner's house property situated in S.F.No.29/2B, Manjampatti Village, Andanur, Gandharvakkottai Taluk, Pudukkottai District.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and perused the materials available on record.

¶29

2/5

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶32

Admittedly, there was a dispute between the petitioner and the other rival

¶33

claimants, namely, Suppan @ Subbaiah, Mahalingam, Somasundaram and Kulanthaivelu. The petitioner has already filed a suit in O.S.No.72 of 2003, on the file of the Principal District Munsif, Pudukkottai and the same was dismissed on 03.11.2004. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the Sub-Court, Pudukkottai in A.S.No.38 of 2008. The learned Sub Judge has granted declaration in favour of the petitioner based on the sale deed. Therefore, the petitioner is the owner of the property based on the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.38 of 2008.

¶34

In view of the above, this Court directs the petitioner to submit an application, along with sale deed which is being referred in the suit as well as the judgment and decree passed in A.S.No.38 of 2008 of the file of Sub-Court, Pudukkottai to the respondents. The respondents shall consider the same and grant the electricity connection to the petitioner. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶35

3/5

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶38

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed in above terms. No cost.

¶39

03.08.2023

¶40

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes am

¶41

4/5

¶42

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

¶43

W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶44

S.SRIMATHY, J

¶45

¶46

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.533 of 2021

¶47

03.08.2023

¶48

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

¶49

5/5

Rengasamy v. The Superintending Engineer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rengasamy v. The Superintending Engineer

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

Srinivasan.N Vs the Dist.Collector

Arulmigu Mandhiramoorthy Vinayagar Temple Vs The Joint Commissioner

Sivakumar Vs the Sub Registrar

Vijaya Baskaran Vs The Superintending Engineer

Muthalibu Vs the District Collector

Suryan Vs The Executive Engineer