Rajagopal vs the Commissioner

Rajagopal vs The Commissioner

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 29, 2025

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1920384

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/1920384
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu,Honourable Mr.Justice M.Jothiraman
Decided On: Jul 29, 2025
Case Number: WP/13196/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajagopal

Respondent

The Commissioner

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 29.07.2025coramthe honourable mrs.justice j.nisha banu and the honourable mr.justice m.jothiraman w.p.no.13196 of 2024 and w.m.p.nos.14341 to 14343 of 20241. rajagopal2. v.rajamohan singh3. g.s.mohan singh4. d.subburayalu ... petitioners -vs-3. belly area block 283 flat owners association,rep. by its secretary k.ravichandar, having office at no.27, belly area main road, g-block, anna nagar west, chennai- 600 040. ... respondents prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records, pertaining to the order dated 03.04.2024 made in z.o.viii.c.no.2861/2023 issued by 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently, forbear the 2nd respondent from evicting, dispossessing and demolishing the belly area block 283 flats at old no.283, new no.27, belly area main road, g.block, anna nagar west, chennai-600 040. for petitioners : mr.g.ethirajulu for r1 & r2 : mr.e.c.ramesh standing counsel for r3 : mr.p.bala murali *****order(by j.nisha banu,j.) when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondents submitted that the relief sought for by the petitioners has become infructuous, as the building in question has already been demolished and therefore, this petition may be closed as infructuous. learned counsel for the petitioners has also made an endorsement in the court bundle to that effect.2. in view of the above submissions and as per the endorsementmade, we are of the view that nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition. hence, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. no costs. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (j.n.b.j.,) (m.j.r,j.,) ar to:j.nisha banu, j.andm.jothiraman, j.ar

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN W.P.No.13196 of 2024 and W.M.P.Nos.14341 to 14343 of 2024
1. Rajagopal
2. V.Rajamohan Singh
3. G.S.Mohan Singh
4. D.Subburayalu ... Petitioners -vs-
3. Belly Area Block 283 Flat Owners Association,
Rep. by its Secretary K.Ravichandar, Having Office at No.27, Belly Area Main Road, G-Block, Anna Nagar West, Chennai- 600 040. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records, pertaining to the order dated 03.04.2024 made in Z.O.VIII.C.No.2861/2023 issued by 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently, forbear the 2nd respondent from evicting, dispossessing and demolishing the Belly Area Block 283 Flats at Old No.283, New No.27, Belly area Main Road, G.Block, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-600 040. For Petitioners : Mr.G.Ethirajulu For R1 & R2 : Mr.E.C.Ramesh Standing Counsel For R3 : Mr.P.Bala Murali *****

ORDER

(By J.Nisha Banu,J.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondents submitted that the relief sought for by the petitioners has become infructuous, as the building in question has already been demolished and therefore, this petition may be closed as infructuous. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also made an endorsement in the Court bundle to that effect.

2. In view of the above submissions and as per the endorsement

made, we are of the view that nothing survives for further adjudication in this Writ Petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (J.N.B.J.,) (M.J.R,J.,) ar To:

J.NISHA BANU, J.

AND

M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2025 Same Parties Rajagopal vs The Commissioner Same Judge Honourable Mrs Justice J. Nisha Banu,Honourable Mr.Justice M....