← Library
Madras High CourtWP Crl./47/2025disposed of

S.Ganesan v. The Sub Inspector Of Police

2025-09-09Honourable Mr Justice N. Sathish Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR S.Ganesh S/o.Subbaraya Padayachi ... Petitioner versus 1.

The Sub-Inspector of Police Muthandikuppam Police Station Muthandikuppam, Panruti Taluk Cuddalore District.

2.

Mr.Murugan S/o.Rajamanickam 3.

Vijaya W/o.Kasi ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to grant protection to the petitioner in enjoying the property bearing New S.No.243/1 Ac.0.04-Old S.No.281/1 in Meliruppu Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District, by considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.04.2025.

Pg.Nos.1/5

For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Baskar For Respondents :

Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor, for R1 Mr.A.M.Rahamath Ali, for R3

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to grant protection to the petitioner in enjoying the property bearing New S.No.243/1 Ac.0.04-Old S.No.281/1 in Meliruppu Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District, by considering his representation dated 17.04.2025.

2. According to the petitioner, he entered into an agreement of sale dated 30.01.1996 with one Rajamanickam, who is the father of respondents 2 and 3 herein in respect of the property bearing New S.No.243/1 Ac.0.04Old S.No.281/1 in Meliruppu Village, Panruti Taluk, Cuddalore District for a sale consideration of Rs.11,000/-. However, the said Rajamanickam failed to complete the sale and hence, the petitioner has filed a suit in O.S.No.24 of 1998 seeking for specific performance as against the said Rajamanikam in respect of 4 cents of subject property with specific boundaries and that the said suit was ultimately decreed in his favour in S.A.No.216 of 2007. Pg.Nos.2/5

Thereafter, the sale deed was executed in his favour in execution proceedings and delivery was also effected on 16.10.2024 in E.P.N.58 of 2017 and recorded on 05.11.2024. In the meanwhile, the original judgment debtor died and the respondents 2 and 3 herein, who are the son and daughter of the original judgment debtor are trying to interfere with the peaceful possession of the petitioner in respect of the subject property and hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present petition seeking Police protection.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the first respondent and the learned counsel for the third respondent and also perused the materials available on record.

4. At the outset, insofar as 4 cents of the subject property is concerned, specific boundaries have been given and father of the respondents 2 and 3 was also a party to the suit in O.S.No.24 of 1998 and delivery was also effected in respect of the subject property in favour of the petitioner and the same issue has reached finality. Pg.Nos.3/5

5. In view of the above, the respondents 2 and 3 have no say that the subject property is their property and hence, the respondent-Police is hereby directed to give necessary protection to the petitioner by considering his representation dated 17.04.2025.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

09.09.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No ms To 1.

The Sub-Inspector of Police Muthandikuppam Police Station Muthandikuppam Panruti Taluk Cuddalore District.

2.

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Pg.Nos.4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

ms 09.09.2025 Pg.Nos.5/5