Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 2850 (MAD)

Damodharan v. State Rep. by The District Collector

2014-08-25

M.JAICHANDREN, R.MAHADEVAN

body2014
Judgment R. Mahadevan, J. 1. Heard Mr.V.Singan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. 2. This Writ Petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from dispossessing the petitioner from the property comprised in Natham S.F.No.30/1, 39/1 and 32 at Thevanur Village in Musiri Taluk, Trichy District. 3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the property in S.F.No.30/1, 39/1 and 32, which is a natham at Thevanur Village in Musiri Taluk, Trichy District, had been in possession and enjoyment of the forefathers of the petitioner and now is in possession of the petitioner. While so, as the respondents had attempted to dispossess the petitioner from the property in question, the petitioner had filed O.S.No.402 of 2012, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Musiri and also obtained an order of interim injunction. He further submitted that though an order of interim injunction is in force, a notice, dated 23.07.2014, has been issued by the third respondent, for eviction of the petitioner, which is in violation of the order of interim injunction. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. A perusal of the materials available on record and the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner shows that treating the petitioner's occupancy in the property in question, as an encroachment, the respondents had issued a notice in the year 2012, against which the petitioner preferred a civil suit before the District Munsif Court, Musiri, in O.S.No.402 of 2012 wherein the District Munsif had granted interim injunction against the respondents. Even thereafter, on 23.07.2014, a notice was issued by the third respondent calling upon the petitioner to vacate from the property in question. However, without giving proper reply to the said notice, by bringing the interim injunction granted by the District Munsif Court, Musiri, in the suit in O.S.No.402 of 2012, to the notice of the third respondent or without challenging the said notice dated 23.07.2014, this writ petition has been filed by the petitioner. 5. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to give appropriate reply to the notice, dated 23.07.2014. 5. In such circumstances, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present Writ Petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioner to give appropriate reply to the notice, dated 23.07.2014. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.