Dismissed

E.Venkatesan v. the District Collector

Madras HC6 Apr 2026WP/33550/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking mandamus to restrain the fifth respondent from constructing a flat without consent. The court held that factual disputes regarding adherence to building rules must be adjudicated by the civil court rather than a writ court.

What did the court decide?

petitioner granted liberty to approach the civil court for appropriate relief.

E.Venkatesan Vs the District Collector — Property and Title | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 33550 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 06-04-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

¶6

WP No. 33550 of 2024 and WMP.No. 36327 of 2024

E.Venkatesan

..Petitioner(s)

Vs.

The District Collector, Greater City Of Chennai, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶11

Special District Revenue Officer, Velachery Taluk, Highways Department, Chennai 600 016.

¶12

The Director / Chairmen, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Egmore, Chennai.

¶13

The Tahsildar, Velachery Taluk, Chennai.

¶14

Chinna Kasaiah Padarthy, S/o Mr.Balaiah, No 547 G. Main, Shantiniketan, Vysya Bank Colony, Arikere, Bhannerghatta Road, Bangalore – 76.

¶15

Also At Ganesh Apartments Old No 37/6 (New No 105) ECR Road, (Old Muttukadu Road) Thiruvamiyur, Chennai 600 041.

¶16

..Respondent(s)

¶17

__________ Page1 of 4

¶18

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

¶19

WP No. 33550 of 2024

¶20

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1-4 to restrain the 5^th respondent from constructing, renovating, modifying, repairing, the Flat No. 6 on second floor, “Ganesh Apartments” having flat measuring about 860 sq.ft at Plot No.37, Door No.105 ECR Road (Muttukadu Road) Thiruvaniyur, Chennai 600 0041 without the consent and knowledge of other flat owners and without getting proper permission or approval from the 1 to 4th respondents and not following the existing building rules and regulations, CMDA rules and Town and Country Planning Act.

¶21

For Petitioner(s): Mr.E.Vinothkumar For Respondent(s): Mrs.S.Anitha Special Government Pleader for R1, R2 & R4

¶22

Ms.K.Mageswari for R3

¶23

Mr.D.Selvam for R5

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking seeking issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1-4 to restrain the 5^th respondent from constructing, renovating, modifying, repairing, the Flat No. 6 on second floor, “Ganesh Apartments” having flat measuring about 860 sq.ft at Plot No.37, Door No.105 ECR Road (Muttukadu Road) Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai 600 0041 without the consent and knowledge of other flat owners and without getting proper permission or approval from the 1 to 4th respondents and not following the existing building rules and regulations, CMDA rules and Town and Country Planning Act.

¶26

__________ Page2 of 4

¶27

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

¶28

WP No. 33550 of 2024

¶29

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

¶30

5^th respondent has put up construction without the consent and knowledge of other flat owners and without getting proper permission or approval from the 1^st

¶31

to 4^th respondents and not following the existing building rules and regulations, CMDA rules and Town and Country Planning Act, hence, the petitioner filed this writ petition for appropriate relief.

¶32

The learned counsel appearing for the 5^th respondent would submit that they have not violated the rules and regulations as alleged by the petitioner therefore, allegations made against the 5^th respondent by the petitioner is not correct.

¶33

In such view of the matter, when the 5^th respondent is disputing the facts with regard to the allegations made by the petitioner, the same can be decided before the appropriate Civil Court to establish his case in the manner known to law for getting proper relief. Hence, this Writ Petition is devoid of merits and the same is accordingly, dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the civil Court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶34

06-04-2026

¶35

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KKN

¶36

__________ Page3 of 4

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 33550 of 2024

¶39

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY, J.

¶40

KKN

¶41

¶42

The District Collector, Greater City Of Chennai, Rajaji Salai, Chennai - 600 001.

¶43

Special District Revenue Officer, Velachery Taluk, Highways Department, Chennai 600 016.

¶44

The Director / Chairmen, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority Egmore, Chennai.

¶45

The Tahsildar, Velachery Taluk, Chennai.

¶46

WP No. 33550 of 2024

¶47

06-04-2026

¶48

__________ Page4 of 4

¶49

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

E.Venkatesan v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Venkatesan v. the District Collector

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

D.Prem Vs Indian Overseas Bank

M/s.Sumathi Constructions Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Akkayamma Vs The District Collector

Jayakumar Vs The Regional Manager

S.Chithiraiselvan Vs the District Collector

N.Chandra Prakash Vs Government of Tamil Nadu