IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 20.09.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

CONT.P.No.150 of 2023

1.Mohammed Iqbal Sait,

S/o Abdul Sattar,

2. Mohammed Imtiaz Sait,

S/o Mohammed Iqbal Sait,

3. Mohammed Aejaz Sait,

S/o Mohammed Iqbal Sait,

All residing at No.15,2^nd Floor,

Thirupura Sundari Colony, Rajaji Nagar,

Pallavaram, Chennai- 600 043.

...Petitioners

Vs

Abdul Kareem,

S/o Abdul Gani,

No.13, Gandhi Nagar, 2^nd Street, Nellikuppam Road,

Nandivaram, Guduvancheri, Chengalpattu Taluk,

Kancheepuram District.

... Respondent

PRAYER:

This Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of Contempt of

Courts Act 1971, praying to punish the respondent for contempt of court

for having violated delibrately and wantonly the order of this Hon'ble

Page 1 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Court dated 22.07.2022 and made in C.M.P.No.11683 of 2022 in

S.A.No.588 of 2022.

For Petitioners

: M/s.N.A.Nassir Hussain

For Respondent

: M/s.Ravikumar Paul , Senior counsel

for M/s.Paul and Paul

ORDER

The above contempt petition has been filed alleging that the

respondent/ contemnor had violated the interim order of injunction granted

by this Court on 22.07.2022 in C.M.P.No.11683 of 2022 in S.A.No.588 of

2022. This Court had ordered statutory notice to the contemnor who is

appearing before this Court.

2. Considering the fact that the entire issue revolved around the

factum of encroachment of 30 feet road, this Court had appointed an

Advocate Commissioner to demarcate the B - Schedule property and file a

report thereon. The Advocate Commissioner, M/s.S.Sahana Banu has also

filed her report along with the survey sketch, photographs, etc., on

01.08.2023. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also filed the entire

Page 2 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

pleadings and exhibits in O.S.No.104 of 2008 on the file of the District

Munsif at Chengalpattu which is the genesis for this proceedings.

3.Before discussing the issue, it is necessary to touch upon the facts

which has culminated in filing of this petition.

4. The petitioner herein had filed O.S.No.104 of 2008 on the file of

the District Munsif at Chengalpattu seeking for a declaration that the

petitioner herein is entitled to enjoy the frontage right at every point on the

western side of the A-schedule property over 30 feet wide road and a

mandatory injunction directing the defendant to remove the pillars and

other encroachments made in B-schedule road.

5. The B-schedule property has been described as follows:

“SCHEDULE-B:

All that piece and parcel of 30 feet wide

Muthusamy Salai shown in the layout on the western

side of Plot No: 1 & 2 remains as traingular piece of

Page 3 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

land with 30 feet width at the north-western end of Plot

No 2 and ends at the south-western end of Plot No:1

being the frontage both Plot No:1 & 2 referred in

Schedule-A in Survey No:19/1B, Vallanchery Village,

Chengalpattu Taluk, Kancheepuram District”.

6. I do not intend to delve on the facts of the case, suffice it to

state that the suit despite contest was decreed in favour of the petitioner by

Judgment and decree dated 30.11.2018. This Judgment and decree dated

30.11.2018 was taken up on appeal by the contemnor who is the defendant

therein before the Additional Subordinate Judge, Chengalpattu at

Kancheepuram District in A.S.No.6 of 2019. The appeal was allowed in

favour of the respondent herein by Judgment and decree dated 25.03.2022

which is the subject matter of challenge in S.A.No.588 of 2022 which is

pending on the file of this Court.

7. From the documents submitted by the petitioner it appears that

pending the suit an Advocate Commissioner has been appointed originally

in I.A.No.1598 of 2008. She has also submitted her report which is

Page 4 of 11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis