Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Revathi Elumalai, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madras High Court challenging a notice dated 09.01.2026 issued by the Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board (formerly Tamil Nadu Slum Clearance Board) for eviction of encroachers from the boundaries of a tenement, alleging that the eviction was causing obstructions to the tenement and the public, and that the Board intended to demolish existing structures to construct a new block. The petitioner had previously instituted a civil suit (O.S. No.9354/1981) in the XVIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, and obtained a decree on 28.01.1985 in her favour. The petitioner's counsel submitted that an execution petition had also been filed. The court observed that since the petitioner had already availed the civil remedy and obtained a decree, the writ petition was not maintainable. Additionally, the Standing Counsel for the respondent Board submitted that the petitioner had been found eligible and an allotment order had been issued to her. In light of this, the court held that the writ petition was unnecessary and dismissed it. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions were closed, and no order as to costs was made.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Maintainability of Writ Petition - Alternative Remedy - Writ petition under Article 226 challenging eviction notice by Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board - Petitioner had already instituted a civil suit and obtained a decree, and execution petition was filed - Held that writ petition is not maintainable when alternative efficacious remedy by way of civil suit is available and already availed (Paras 2-3).
B) Property Law - Eviction - Allotment Order - Petitioner found eligible and allotment order issued by respondent - Held that writ petition becomes unnecessary and infructuous in view of allotment order (Para 3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ petition challenging an eviction notice is maintainable when the petitioner has already obtained a civil decree and filed an execution petition, and when the respondent has issued an allotment order.
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ petition not maintainable when civil remedy available
- Writ petition becomes infructuous if allotment order issued
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (03) 152
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
Mr.S.Mohanavadivelan, Mr.Abishek Murthy, Mr.B.Balaji
Government of Tamil Nadu, Chairman Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board, Executive Engineer Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 challenging eviction notice issued by Tamil Nadu Urban Habitat Development Board.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of eviction notice dated 09.01.2026 and direction to respondents to consider the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No.9354/1981.
Filing Reason
Petitioner challenged eviction notice alleging it caused obstructions to her tenement and public, and Board intended to demolish structures.
Previous Decisions
Civil Suit O.S. No.9354/1981 decreed on 28.01.1985 in favour of petitioner; execution petition filed.
Issues
Whether the writ petition is maintainable when the petitioner has already obtained a civil decree and filed an execution petition.
Whether the writ petition becomes infructuous in view of the allotment order issued to the petitioner.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that a civil suit was instituted and a decree was issued, and execution petition has been filed.
Respondent's Standing Counsel submitted that the petitioner is found eligible and allotment order has been issued.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable when the petitioner has already availed the alternative remedy of a civil suit and obtained a decree, and the execution petition is pending. Further, if the respondent has issued an allotment order in favour of the petitioner, the writ petition becomes unnecessary and infructuous.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner has already instituted a Civil Suit and a decree came to be issued. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the execution petition has also been filed. Under these circumstances, the present writ petition is not maintainable.
However, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Urban Rehabitat Development Board would submit that the petitioner is found eligible and allotment order has been issued to the petitioner. That being the factum, the writ petition is unnecessary.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed civil suit O.S. No.9354/1981 in XVIII Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, which was decreed on 28.01.1985. Execution petition was filed. Subsequently, eviction notice dated 09.01.2026 was issued by the 3rd respondent. Petitioner then filed the present writ petition on an unspecified date. The writ petition was heard and dismissed on 03.03.2026.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
