Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, P.Devaraj, filed a Writ Petition (WP No. 3628 of 2025) before the Madras High Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents (Greater Chennai Corporation and other authorities) from evicting him from his property situated at old Survey No.32/6, New T.S. No.150 in Kolathur Village, Chennai, measuring 14,160 sq.ft. or 32 cents of land. The petitioner claimed that the respondents were attempting to evict him without due process of law. However, the court noted that the petitioner had already instituted a civil suit challenging the judgment and decree, and an appeal suit was pending. The court observed that the writ petition seeking an injunction was not maintainable in light of the pending civil proceedings. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner must pursue his remedies in the civil forum. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Maintainability - Alternative Remedy - Writ of Mandamus - When a civil suit and appeal are already pending, a writ petition seeking the same relief of injunction is not maintainable. The High Court held that the petitioner must pursue the civil remedy and cannot invoke writ jurisdiction as an alternative forum. (Paras 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus seeking injunction against eviction is maintainable when a civil suit and appeal are already pending.
Final Decision
The Writ Petition was dismissed. No costs.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus not maintainable when civil suit and appeal are pending
- Alternative remedy of civil suit bars writ jurisdiction
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (02) 70
WP No. 3628 of 2025 and WMP No. 4025 of 2025
S. M. Subramaniam, C. Kumarappan
Mr.A.E.Ravichandran (for petitioner), Mr.M.Suresh Kumar, AAG assisted by Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu (for R1, R5 to R7), Mr.R.Ramanlal, AAG assisted by Mr.T.Arun Kumar (for R2 to R4), Mr.M.Babu Muthu Meeran, Addl.P.P. (for R8), Mr.N.Jothi, Senior Counsel for Mr.S.Vinod (for Intervenor)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to restrain respondents from evicting the petitioner from his property.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from evicting him from his property without due process of law.
Filing Reason
Petitioner alleged that respondents were attempting to evict him from his property without following due process of law.
Previous Decisions
A civil suit had been instituted by the petitioner challenging the judgment and decree, and an appeal suit was pending.
Issues
Whether a writ of mandamus seeking injunction against eviction is maintainable when a civil suit and appeal are already pending.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that respondents were attempting to evict him without due process of law.
Respondents likely argued that the writ petition was not maintainable due to pending civil proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ of mandamus seeking an injunction is not maintainable when a civil suit and appeal are already pending, as the petitioner must pursue the civil remedy.
Judgment Excerpts
Admittedly, Civil Suit has been instituted by the petitioner challenging the judgment and decree. An appeal suit has been instituted which is pending. That being the factum, writ petition seeking the relief in the nature of injunction is not maintainable. Therefore, the present Writ Petition stands dismissed.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed a civil suit challenging a judgment and decree. An appeal suit was pending. Subsequently, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus to restrain eviction. The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of maintainability.
