T.Rajendran, Hindu Male Aged 73 Year v. D.Rajasekar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.07.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN Contempt Petition No.865 of 2024 T.Rajendran .. Petitioner -vs1. D.Rajasekar The Zonal Officer, Zone No.15, Corporation of Chennai, Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

2. Vishnavi The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Butt Road, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai 600 016.

3. Mr.Dhyan The Inspector of Police, T.15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Okkiyam Thoraippakkam, Chennai 600 097.

4. Mr.Padmanaban Executive Engineer, Zone No.15, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

1/5

5. Mr.Raja Assistant Executive Engineer, Zone No.15, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

6. Mr.Velmurugan The Sub Inspector of Police, T.15, Kannagi Nagar Police Station, Okkiyam Thoraippakkam, Chennai 600 097.

7. Mr.Suresh Assistant Engineer, Greater Chennai Corporation, No.120, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Old Mahabalipuram Road, Sholinganallur, Chennai 600 119.

... Respondents Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act seeking to punish the respondents for having committed contempt of court by willfully disobeying the order of this Court dated 27.02.2023 passed in W.P.No.3521 of 2023.

For the Petitioner :

Mr.J.Arul Prakasam For the Respondents :

Mr.P.Kumaresan Addl. Adv. General Assisted by Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu, Stdg. Counsel, for RR 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7.

* * * * *

ORDER

2/5

(made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.) By an order dated 27.02.2023, the Division Bench directed the authorities to conduct an enquiry on the claim of the petitioner that he has got title to the land in dispute and the respondents are attempting to lay a road over it. While directing the authorities to complete the enquiry within a period of eight weeks, the Division Bench directed the respondents to maintain status quo. Subsequently, the respondents conducted an enquiry and rejected the claim of the petitioner on 24.07.2023. The said order was communicated to the petitioner on 02.12.2023. That was put to challenge in W.P.No.1232 of 2024 which came to be dismissed directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate Civil Court to establish his title. It is stated that the petitioner has filed a suit seeking a declaration of his title.

2. In the meantime, the contempt petition has been filed stating that there is a violation of the order of status quo and that the road was laid without serving the order on the petitioner. The said allegation appears to be incorrect. Since now the petitioner has instituted a suit, he has to work out his rights in that suit. 3/5

3. We see no cause for contempt. Hence, the contempt petition is closed.

(R.S.M., J.) (V.L.N., J.) 22.07.2024 Index : Yes/No NC : Yes/No sra 4/5

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

and V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

(sra) 22.07.2024 5/5