Allowed

P.Chakravarthy v. The Commissioner

Madras HC16 Dec 2024WP/4709/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, purchaser of Plot 65-B from a co-operative housing society, sought restraint against the municipality erecting markers claiming the plot as park land. An enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act 1983 was pending. The court allowed the writ, directing notice boards be removed until the enquiry concludes on 28.02.2025.

What did the court decide?

Name board and markers removed till 28.02.2025 pending enquiry under Section 81 TN Co-operative Societies Act with notice to petitioner.

P.Chakravarthy Vs The Commissioner — Cooperative Societies | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16.12.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

W.P.No. 4709 of 2019

¶7

And

¶8

W.M.P.No. 5339 of 2019

¶9

Mr.P.Chakravarthy ... Petitioner

¶10

..Vs..

¶11

The Commissioner Anakaputhur Municipality No.1, Bazaar Street, Anakaputhur Chennai – 600 070

¶12

Director Town and Country Planning No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶13

The Secretary Tambaram Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., No.11, VOC Street, West Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045.

¶14

The Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Tamil Nadu Co-operative Housing Federation Campus, II Floor, No.48, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007. [R4- Suo Motu impleaded as per order dated 19.03.2024 in W.P.No. 4709 of 2019] ... Respondents

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents from committing trespass into the property of the petitioner in Plot No. 65-B measuring 2225 sq.ft., in S.No.135/11 of Gowri Avenue layout in No.99, Anakaputhur Village, Saidapet Taluk, Kancheepuram District and further remove the marker stones and notice boards from the said land.

¶18

	***
For Petitioner	::	Mr. B.Natarajan
For 1^stRespondent	::	Mr. P.Srinivas
For 2^ndRespondent	::	Mr.V.Nanmaran Additional Government Pleader
For 3^rdRespondent	::	Mr.P.Anandakumar
For 4^thRespondent	::	Mrs. Geetha Thamaraiselvan Special Government Pleader

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Mandamus seeking restraint against the respondents, particularly, the first respondent from entering into the property of the petitioner at Plot No. 65-B measuring 2225 sq.ft., in S.No.135/11 of Gowri Avenue layout in No.99, Anakaputhur Village, Saidapet Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it had been stated that the aforementioned Plot No. 65-B had been purchased by the petitioner from the third respondent, the Secretary, Tambaram Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. It had been stated that the petitioner had been in peaceful enjoyment of the same. However, in the first week of January, the first respondent / the Commissioner, Anakaputhur Municipality had entered into the lands and had erected marker stones and sign/notice boards claiming that the said plots is park land belonging to the first respondent.

¶24

The first respondent claims that when the layout was formed, the said plots had been demarked as a park. A status report had been filed by the fourth respondent, who had been subsequently implicated, namely, the Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Tamil Nadu Co-operative Housing Federation Campus, wherein it had been stated that the third respondent Society had sold Plot No. 65-B to the petitioner by a sale deed dated 12.05.1998. It had been stated that Anakaputhur Town Panchayat had granted approval to the lay out and the three plots namely, 65A, 65B and 65C had been earmarked for park. It had been stated that without proper verification, the sale deed had been executed.

¶25

Let me not enter into any discussion on that particular

¶26

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

¶27

¶28

aspect since in the status report, it had been stated that an enquiry under Section 81 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act 1983 had been ordered by the Deputy Registrar (Housing) Chengalpet Region, by proceedings in R.C.No. 384/2024/c dated 13.12.2024. I am confident that notice would be issued to the petitioner and let the enquiry be commenced and completed within a period of 8 weeks on or before 28.02.2025.

¶29

The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that during the pendency, the name board and the markers must be removed Since time limit for completion of the enquiry has been prescribed, the name board and markers may be removed till 28.02.2025 and thereafter a decision can be taken to put back the name board and markers depending on the result of the enquiry. Proper notice must be issued to the petitioner and the petitioner must participate in the enquiry. Orders must be passed before 28.02.2025.

¶30

The Writ Petitioner stands allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed. No order as to costs.

¶31

16.12.2024

¶32

vsg Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking / Non Speaking Order

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

¶36

The Commissioner Anakaputhur Municipality No.1, Bazaar Street, Anakaputhur Chennai – 600 070 2. Director Town and Country Planning No.807, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 3. The Secretary Tambaram Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., No.11, VOC Street, West Tambaram, Chennai – 600 045. 4. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies (Housing), Tamil Nadu Co-operative Housing Federation Campus, II Floor, No.48, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

¶37

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

¶38

¶39

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.,

¶40

vsg

¶41

W.P.No. 4709 of 2019 And W.M.P.No. 5339 of 2019

¶42

16.12.2024

¶43

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

P.Chakravarthy v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Chakravarthy 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

K.Devi Vs the District collector

Indira Ramasami Vs the Commioner for Milk

M/s.Sun Motors Vs M/s.Ashok Leyland Ltd.

Mr.a.P.K.Vadivel Vs the Secretary to Government

K.Loganathan Vs Deputy Registrar of

Mahalakshmi Vs the Secretary