Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 39759 (MAD)

K.BABU v. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER

WA/1222/2025 · 2025-04-21

K Rajasekar, S M Subramaniam

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WA.No.1222 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 21.04.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR WA.No.1222 of 2025 K.Babu ... Appellant Vs. 1. The Executive Officer, M/s.Arulmigu Agatheeswarar Prasanna, Venkatesa Perumal Devasthanam Temple, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 2. The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 3. The Commissioner, HR & CE, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 4. The Trustee, M/s.Arulmigu Agatheeswarar Prasanna, Venkatesa Perumal Devasthanam Temple, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 06.03.2025 in W.P.No.7859 of 2025. Page 1 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA.No.1222 of 2025 For Appellant : Mr.S.Aswin Karthikeyan For Respondents : Mr.K.Karthikeyan Government Advocate (HR&CE) for R1 to R4 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.) Under assail is the order dated 06.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.7859 of 2025. 2. Admittedly, an order of eviction was passed against the appellant and in favour of the Temple in O.S.No.4301 of 1984 by a decree and judgment dated 14.07.2003. The execution petition was filed in E.P.No.1882 of 2009 and after protracting the matter all along, the appellant has chosen to file the writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to consider the representation. 3. Even such a direction to consider the representation would do no service to the cause of justice. It will result in multiplication of proceedings which occurred in the present case. By filing litigation after litigation, the appellant cannot continue in the temple premises in the absence https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA.No.1222 of 2025 of any valid lease. Since the eviction has already been ordered and delivery is also ordered by the Execution Court, the writ Court has rightly dismissed the writ petition. 4. The respondents 1 to 3 are directed to execute the eviction as ordered by this Court, if required, with the assistance of the Police. With the above direction, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. [S.M.S,J.] [K.R.S,J.] 21.04.2025 veda Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation:Yes/No To 1. The Executive Officer, M/s.Arulmigu Agatheeswarar Prasanna, Venkatesa Perumal Devasthanam Temple, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 2. The Joint Commissioner, HR & CE, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. 3. The Commissioner, HR & CE, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA.No.1222 of 2025 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. AND K.RAJASEKAR,J. veda 4. The Trustee, M/s.Arulmigu Agatheeswarar Prasanna, Venkatesa Perumal Devasthanam Temple, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. WA.No.1222 of 2025 21.04.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis