V. Kalyani Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police, Madurai

V. Kalyani vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, Madurai

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Apr 21, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1191231

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1191231
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: P.N. Prakash
Decided On: Apr 21, 2016
Case Number: Crl.O.P.(MD) No. 6022 of 2016
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

V. Kalyani

Respondent

State represented by The Inspector of Police, Madurai

Excerpt

(common prayer: criminal original petition filed under section 482 of cr.p.c., praying to direct the respondent to register an fir on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein dated 19.2.2016 and investigate the case in accordance with law.) 1. this petition has been filed to direct the respondent to register an fir on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein dated 19.2.2016 and investigate the case in accordance with law. 2. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned government advocate (crl.side) appearing for the state and perused the materials placed on record. 3. on reading of the complaint dated 19.02.2016, it is seen that the petitioner has entered into a sale agreement dated 14.09.2007 with the opposite parties under which the petitioner had given rs.30,000/- to the opposite parties and had also permitted them to stay in the house and pay him rent. now, it is alleged by the petitioner that the opposite parties are neither vacating the house nor are they paying rent. the dispute essentially appears to be civil in nature and hence, no positive direction can be issued to the respondent police to register an fir. 4. accordingly, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law.

Full Judgment

(Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondent to register an FIR on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein dated 19.2.2016 and investigate the case in accordance with law.)

1. This petition has been filed to direct the respondent to register an FIR on the basis of the complaint given by the petitioner herein dated 19.2.2016 and investigate the case in accordance with law.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the State and perused the materials placed on record.

3. On reading of the complaint dated 19.02.2016, it is seen that the petitioner has entered into a sale agreement dated 14.09.2007 with the opposite parties under which the petitioner had given Rs.30,000/- to the opposite parties and had also permitted them to stay in the house and pay him rent. Now, it is alleged by the petitioner that the opposite parties are neither vacating the house nor are they paying rent. The dispute essentially appears to be civil in nature and hence, no positive direction can be issued to the respondent police to register an FIR.

4. Accordingly, this petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate forum in the manner known to law.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties V. Kalyani vs State represented by The Inspector of Police, M... Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge P.N. Prakash