Dismissed

C.Kasi (Deceased) v. Rajam Radhakrishnan

Madras HC11 Jun 2024WA/1341/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal challenged the Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board's permission granted for eviction to enforce a rent control decree. The court observed that since the permission was an execution-related order, objections should be raised before the executing court, and the appeal stood disposed of with liberty to approach the executing court.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was disposed of with liberty to raise objections to the eviction proceedings before the executing court; CMP No.8560 of 2022 closed.

C.Kasi (Deceased) Vs Rajam Radhakrishnan — Madras HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶8

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶9

C.Kasi (deceased)

¶10

1.K.Saraswathy 2.K.Appanraj 3.K.Pakiaraj

¶11

4.K.Navinkumar 5.K.Prathiba ... Appellants

¶12

versus

¶13

1.Rajam Radhakrishnan 2.A.Jayanthi

¶14

3.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai Chennai-600 005.

¶15

4.Rani

¶16

5.Raja ... Respondents

¶17

1/6

¶18

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

¶19

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶20

PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed against the order of the learned Single Judge

¶21

in WP No.22397 of 2021 dated 09.12.2021.

¶22

For the Appellants :Mr.K.Venkateswaran For the Respondents :Mr.M.Syed Ibrahim for respondents 1 and 2 Mr.G.Venkatesan Standing Counsel for third respondent/ Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)

¶25

This Writ Appeal is filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in WP No.22397 of 2021 dated 09.12.2021.

¶26

The Writ Appeal has been preferred by the legal heirs of the deceased second respondent in the writ petition, challenging the direction issued by the Writ Court to the third respondent/Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board to comply with the order of this Court in Rev.Appl.Nos.201 to 203 of 2019 dated 04.02.2020 and to issue appropriate permission to the second

¶27

2/6

¶28

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

¶29

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶30

respondent herein for enforcing the decree passed by the Rent Control Authorities. The relevant portion of the order is extracted hereunder:

¶31

"In view of above submissions, this Court directs the 1st respondent to comply with the order of this Court dated 04.02.2020 and issue appropriate permission to the 2nd petitioner for enforcing the decree passed by the Rent Control Authorities within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order"

¶32

Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that pursuant to the said order of the Writ Court, the third respondent/Slum Clearance Board has passed an order dated 21.02.2022, wherein the Slum Clearance Board has granted permission for eviction in order to comply with the direction issued by the Writ Court. He further submits that without providing sufficient opportunity to the appellants, the Slum Clearance Board has granted permission for eviction.

¶33

The appeal has been preferred by the appellants on 23.03.2022

¶34

and same was numbered on 06.05.2022 The third respondent/Slum Clearance Board has passed the order of granting permission for eviction to

¶35

3/6

¶36

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

¶37

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶38

the second respondent on 21.04.2022. Therefore, the appeal has been

¶39

numbered only after the said proceedings has been passed by the Slum Clearance Board. Since, it is only a permission granted by the Slum Clearance Board to the private respondent namely the second respondent for executing the decree passed by the Rent Control Authorities, if the appellants are aggrieved by the said order, the appellants can make all their objections at the time of execution petition being filed by the second respondent before executing court or it if for the appellants to challenge the said proceedings, if is permissible under any other law.

¶40

With the above liberty, the writ appeal stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, CMP No.8560 of 2022 is closed.

¶41

[D.K.K., J.] [K.B., J.] 11.06.2024

¶42

Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No mrn

¶43

4/6

¶44

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

¶45

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶46

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board, No.5, Kamarajar Salai Chennai-600 005.

¶47

5/6

¶48

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

¶49

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶50

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J. and K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶51

(mrn)

¶52

WA No.1341 of 2022

¶53

11.06.2024

¶54

6/6

¶55

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

C.Kasi (Deceased) v. Rajam Radhakrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Kasi (Deceased) v. Rajam Radhakrishnan

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

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs S.Suganthi

The Chairman Vs S.Murugan

K.Eshak, Vs Union of India

The Principal Vs C.Gayathri

Dr.M.Mathiyazhagan Vs the Member Secretary

Tdi International India (P) Ltd., Vs the Airport Director