SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 26863

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, R.POORNIMA, JJ
Arumugam – Appellant
Versus
The Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanathapuram District – Respondent


Advocates:
For Petitioner: Mr.SA.Iniyavan Abdullah, for M/s.Ajmal Associates.
For Respondent:Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate.

Table of Content
1. challenges eviction order under section 6. (Para 1)
2. section 7 notice mandatory; order quashed. (Para 2)

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was delivered by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) The writ petitioner herein challenges the order dated

27.11.2018 passed by the Tahsildar, Thiruvadanai Taluk under Section 6 of the Tamil Nadu Land Encroachment Act, 1905. The order impugned in this writ petition is liable to be quashed on a short ground.

2. It is well settled that before passing an order under Section 6 of the Act, notice under Section 7 of the Act must be given. In the case on hand, this notice has not been given. A specific ground has also been taken to this effect in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition. The counter affidavit filed by the respondent does not meet this ground. It is not the case of the respondent that notice under Section 7 of the Act was issued. Hence the order impugned in the writ petition is quashed. This writ petition stands allowed. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top