Dismissed¶29

N.Kumar v. The commissioner

Madras HC19 Feb 2025WMP/15445/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal of a writ miscellaneous petition seeking correction/modification of survey number (S.No.7/3 to S.No.7/2) in W.P. No. 33565 of 2017; Madras High Court ruled modification impermissible where the writ affidavit itself pleaded S.No.7/3, and directed the petitioner to the remedy of a review application. Keywords: survey number modification, S.No.7/2, S.No.7/3, review application, Corporation of Chennai, Tiruvallur District, Ambattur Taluk.

What did the court decide?

No substantive relief; the petition was dismissed with liberty preserved to the petitioner to file a review application narrating the facts now pleaded in the miscellaneous petition. ¶29

N.Kumar Vs The commissioner — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

WMP NO. 15445 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 19-02-2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. S. SUNDAR

¶5

WMP NO. 15445 of 2022

¶6

¶7

WP NO. 33565 OF 2017

¶8

N.Kumar

¶9

Door No.91, Easwaran Koil Street, Selai Village, Tiruvallur District

¶10

Petitioner(s)

¶11

¶12

The commissioner Corporation of Chennai, Poonamalle High Road, Chennai and 4 Others

¶13

Respondent(s)

¶14

WP NO. 33565 of 2017

¶15

N.Kumar

¶16

Door No.91, Easwaran Koil Street, Selai Village, Tiruvallur District

¶17

¶18

The commissioner

¶19

Door No.91, Easwaran Koil Street, Selai Village, Tiruvallur District

¶20

WMP NO. 15445 of 2022

¶21

For Petitioner(s): Mr.L.Sanjai Kumar for P.Subba Reddy Aparna Devi

¶22

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

¶23

G.Nagarajan For Respondent(s):

¶24

WP NO. 33565 of 2017

¶25

For : M/s.P.Subba Reddy K.Aparna Devi J.D.Srikanth Varma Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, Standing counsel for RR1 & 3 Mr. G.Nanmaran For Rr2 To 5 R.Gopinath-ms/549/2005 Sc For R1 Memo Dt 13/03/2020 For :

¶26

ORDER

¶27

This petition for modification is filed with a limited scope of modifying the survey number as S.No.7/2 in stead of S.No.7/3. This Court is unable to entertain this petition for modification for the simple reason that the

¶28

petitioner, in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, has specifically referred to S.No.7/3. Since the petitioner has come to Court with a prayer in the affidavit regarding S.No.7/3, it is not possible for this Court to modify the order. However, it is open to the petitioner to file a review narrating the facts that are now pleaded in this miscellaneous petition.

¶29

2.Therefore, with a liberty preserved to the petitioner to file a review application, this petition is dismissed.

¶30

19-02-2025

¶31

¶32

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

¶33

WMP NO. 15445 of 2022

¶34

¶35