M.M.M.Thiagaraj v. The Commissioner of Police,

ORDER This writ petition has been filed for direction to the first and second respondents to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to carry out cleaning, safeguarding and construction works in the property which was purchased by the petitioner through auction sale.

¶2The third and fourth respondents had borrowed loan from State Bank of India by mortgaging the subject property as security. Thereafter, they committed default and as such, the banker proceeded with the SARFAESI Act proceedings and the property was brought for sale. The said property was purchased in the auction by the petitioner. The petitioner was issued sale certificate and it is under challenge under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act on the file of the Debt Recovery Tribunal -II, Chennai in SA.no.14 of 2024. While pending second appeal, the petitioner filed affidavit thereby undertaking not to alienate the property which was purchased through auction sale. Now the petitioner has submitted representation seeking police protection to the petitioner while putting up any compound wall in and around the property which was purchased by the petitioner. When the appeal is pending challenging the very sale certificate before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai in SA.No.14 of 2024 and when the petitioner also filed undertaking affidavit not to alienate the subject property, the petitioner ought to have approached the Tribunal to get permission to put up any construction in the subject property.

¶3The learned counsel for third and fourth respondents submitted that the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court gave liberty to the petitioner to challenge the sale certificate dated 18.07.2023 under Section 17 of SARFAESI Act. Accordingly, the sale certificate was challenged before Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai in SA.No.14 of 2024, in which the petitioner filed undertaking affidavit not to alienate the subject property. Therefore, construction cannot be put up without permission of the Tribunal.

¶4In view of the above, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai seeking permission to put up any construction in the subject property. If the petitioner is granted any permission to put up a construction, the second respondent is directed to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to comply with the orders to be passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Chennai.

¶5With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

11.06.2026 Index : Yes/No

: Yes/No Speaking/non-speaking order lok To

1.The Commissioner of Police, Avadi Commissionerate, Avadi - 600 054.

2.The Inspector of Police, M-5, Redhills Police Station, Chennai - 600 052.

3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras W.P.Crl.No.834oofo2025 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN,oJ. lok oWPoo.oCrlo.oNoo.o834ooofo202oo5o

11.06.2026 Pageo6oofo6

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11.06.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN WP.Crl.No.834 of 2025 M.M.M.Thiagaraj ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner of Police, Avadi Commissionerate, Avadi - 600 054. 2.The Inspector of Police, M-5, Redhills Police Station, Chennai - 600 052. 3.P.Leelavati 4.K.Parthiban Rasu ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition(Crl.) filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a WRIT OF MANDAMUS directing the 1st and 2nd Respondents/police to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner, petitioners men, and workers, to carry out cleaning, safeguarding, and construction works in the Petitioner's subject property, from the interference with petitioner's peaceful possession by the 3rd and 4th Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari, Senior Counsel for Mr.D.Murugan For Respondents For R1 & 2 : Mr.R.Ganesh Kumar, Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) For R3 & 4 : Mr.R.Muniyapparaj for Mr.S.Sathish Kumar