Madras High CourtWP/6089/2022disposed of

R.Ponnambalam v. The District Collector

2026-03-02Honourable Mr Justice Krishnan Ramasamy6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and WMP Nos.6178 & 6179 of 2022

1. R.Ponnambalam

2. P. Mannammal ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The District Collector, O/o Kanchipuram Collectorate, Kanchipuram District 631 501.

2. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sub Collector Redressal Tribunal for Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens, Kanchipuram Revenue Division, O/o Kanchipuram Collectorate, Kanchipuram Distirct 631 501.

3. S.Senbagavalli

4. The Inspector of Police, C-3 Manimangalam Police Station, Mudichur to Sriperumbudur Road, Manimangalam, Kanchipuram Distirct.

..Respondent(s) Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the entire records in connection with the order of the 1st respondent dated 04.06.2021 made in Na.Ka.No.8051/2020/M.1 and quash the same.

For Petitioner(s) :

Mr.K.V.Muthu Visakan For Respondent(s) :

Mrs.S.Indhu Bala, AGP for R1, 2 & 4 Mr.P.K.Ganesh for R3

ORDER

Challenge was made against the order dated 04.06.2021 passed by the first respondent.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the property comprised in New Survey No.586/2022 to an extent of 4050 Sq.ft., situated at Padappai, Kanchipuram District was settled in favour of the third respondent, who is none other than the petitioners' adopted daughter, by way of a settlement deed dated 10.03.2008. Subsequent to the settlement, the third respondent refused to maintain the petitioners. Therefore, they filed a complaint before the second respondent, wherein, an order dated 26.11.2019 was passed by directing the SRO, Padappai to cancel the settlement deed dated 10.03.2008. Challenging the said order, the third respondent preferred an appeal before the first respondent, who in turn passed a conditional order dated 04.06.2021 by directing the third respondent to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- each to the petitioners as maintenance and set aside the order passed by the second respondent. Aggrieved over the said order dated 04.06.2021, the petitioners have come forward with this writ petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that though the first respondent vide order dated 04.06.2021 directed the third respondent not to evict the petitioners from the aforesaid property, the third respondent is trying to evict them. Accordingly, he prays for appropriate orders.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that as per the order of the first respondent dated 04.06.2021, she is ready and willing to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- each to the petitioners as monthly maintenance. He would further submit that the third respondent has no idea or not taking any steps to evict the petitioners from the aforesaid property and she is ready to allow the petitioners to collect the rent coming from the aforesaid property.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. The facts in the present case are not in dispute. The main grievance of the petitioners is only with regard to the eviction from the aforesaid property by the third respondent, for which, the third respondent has submitted that she is not at all taking any steps to evict the petitioners from the building and as directed by the first respondent, the third respondent is ready to pay a sum of Rs.4,000/- each to the petitioners, as maintenance. That apart, she is also ready

to allow the petitioners to collect the house rent of Rs.10,000/-, coming from the aforesaid property. Such being the case, this Court does not find any error in the impugned order passed by the first respondent and issues the following directions:- (i) The third respondent is directed to pay the entire due of maintenance amount to the petitioners, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, the third respondent shall continue to pay the maintenance amount of Rs.4,000/- each to the petitioners, as ordered by the first respondent, on or before 10th of every calendar month, without fail. (ii) The third respondent shall not disturb the petitioners in leasing out any of the portion and collecting the rent from the same and in regard to eviction, the third respondent is directed not to take any steps to evict the petitioners during their life time.

(iii) In the event, any steps have been taken on the part of the third respondent to evict the petitioners from the aforesaid property, the petitioners are at liberty to approach this Court to revive the writ petition to set aside the settlement deed dated 10.03.2006, settled in favour of the third respondent.

With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

02-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order VM To:

1. The District Collector, O/o Kanchipuram Collectorate, Kanchipuram District 631 501.

3. The Inspector of Police, C-3 Manimangalam Police Station, Mudichur to Sriperumbudur Road, Manimangalam, Kanchipuram Distirct.

KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J.

VM 02-03-2026