Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 43416
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, K.RAJASEKAR, JJ
S.Kannan – Appellant
Versus
K.M.Alagesan – Respondent
Writ Appeal | W.A(MD)Nos.1865 & 1866 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Raghuvaran Gopalan, Mr.J.Britto Kanikairaj
For the Respondents: Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam, Mr.J.Lawrence, Mr.T.Senthil Kumar, Mr.P.Mahendran
Court emphasized independent assessment compliance with statutory procedures regarding demolition and tenant rights.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act - Section 136 - Appeal for demolition of dilapidated premises - Inspection by Civil Engineer directed - The court ordered an independent inspection for clarity on the premises' condition, indicating due process under the Act must be followed. The appellant raised concerns regarding notice issuance. The local authority must adhere to the Act's procedures. (Paras 2-4)
(B) Appeals - Writ Appeal - The Court discerned the appeal's factual controversy but refrained from ruling on merits, emphasizing compliance with statutory duties and ensuring proper inspections within the defined timeline.
Facts of the case:
The appellant claimed to be a tenant of a property undergoing a proposed demolition. Disputes arose over notices issued about the building's condition.
Findings of Court:
Independent assessment required, ensuring no bias and adherence to legal procedures.
Issues: Whether proper notice was provided during the demolition process and the necessity for an independent inspection of the premises.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court highlighted the importance of independent verification in matters of property safety and the adherence to legal processes regarding public safety.
Result: Appeals disposed of. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. placement of responsibility regarding property condition. (Para 2) |
| 2. court's order for a procedural safety inspection. (Para 3) |
(By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)
Heard both sides.
2.The appellant is a tenant in occupation of the petition mentioned building. The property belongs to one Alagesan. According to the landlord, the building has become old and dilapidated and requires immediate demolition. It appears that the local body had already issued notices under Section 136 of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act . The claim of the appellant / tenant is that this notice was addressed only to the landlord and not to him.
3.We do not want to go into this factual controversy. Suffice to say that a fresh inspection and examination shall be conducted by a Civil Engineer from PWD in the presence of the landlord as well as the tenant. If according to the said engineer, the building in question requires demolition, it is always open to the local body to take action in accordance with the said opinion. We make it clear that such an inspection or examination shall be done by any engineer other than the one who had already issued the stability certificate dated 09.02.2024. This exercise shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. We make it clear that we have not gone into the merits of the matter. It is needless to add that the Commissioner of Local body will adhere to the procedure set out in the Act.
