M.JAICHANDREN
Padikalai – Appellant
Versus
District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai – Respondent
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
2. At this stage of the hearing of the Writ Petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that a second appeal, in S.A.No.122 of 2004, is pending on the file of this Court, relating to the land in question. He had further submitted that the adjacent land owner has also filed a civil suit, in O.S.No.21 of 2006, before the District Munsif Court, Melur, and it is pending adjudication.
3. In such circumstances, the relief prayed for by the petitioner, in the present Writ Petition, cannot be granted. However, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner had filed a suit for bare injunction, in O.S.No.141 of 1997, before the District Munsif Court, Melur, and the said suit had been decreed, in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, the defendant had filed an appeal, in A.S.No.112 of 1998, before the I Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, and the said appeal had been dismissed. Thereafter, the defendant in the said suit had filed a second appeal before this Court, in S.A.No.12
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.