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) 31463

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, M.JOTHIRAMAN, JJ
Lilly Jemi – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Tirunelveli District – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.7860 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.Laxmi Mahendraa
For the Respondents:Mr.P.T.Thiraviam (R1 to R3), Government Advocate

Writ jurisdiction not invoked for civil property disputes pending in civil court.

Headnote:First Paragraph: Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner sought mandamus to restrain unauthorized construction and direct action against private respondents. Essential facts involve civil dispute over properties where petitioner filed suit O.S.No.174 of 2025 for declaration, injunction, and cancellation of sale deed, currently pending before Subordinate Court, Valliyoor. Court found ongoing civil suit precludes writ intervention on merits. Second Paragraph: Issues framed around directing officials to act against alleged unauthorized construction amid title dispute. Ratio decidendi: Court declined merits review due to pending civil suit, emphasizing appropriate remedy lies therein; building permission application by respondent returned for defects. Last Paragraph: Writ petition dismissed without costs.

Table of Content
1. admission stage final disposal by consent. (Para 2 , 3)
2. pending civil suit over property dispute. (Para 4)
3. building permission application returned for defects. (Para 5)
4. writ dismissed; pursue remedy in civil suit. (Para 6)

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.)

This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the official respondents herein to take action as against the private respondents for the unauthorized construction put up by them in the subject property.

2.Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the first to third respondents. In view of the order proposed to be passed in this writ petition, notice to the respondents 5 to 7 is dispensed with.

3.By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

4.Perusal of the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition shows that there is a civil dispute between the petitioner and the private respondents herein with regard to the subject properties. In this regard, the petitioner has already filed a civil suit in O.S.No.174 of 2025 on the file of the learned Subordinate Court, Valliyoor as against the private respondents for declaration and permanent injunction and also to cancel the sale deed said to have been executed by the sixth and seventh respondents with regard to the subject properties and the said suit is pending. At this stage, the petitioner seeks to take action as against the private respondents for the alleged unauthorized construction.

5.The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the official respondents, on instructions, submitted that the seventh respondent has applied for building plan permission through online mode and the said application has been considered and returned alleging some defects.

6.Be that as it may, since the petitioner has already filed a civil suit with regard to the dispute between the parties and the same is pending, this Court is not inclined to go into the detailed merits of the dispute involved in this writ petition. It is for the petitioner to work out his remedy in the pending suit.

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 Back to top