Disposed

Malliga Begum v. the Union of India

Madras HC17 Apr 2014CRP(MD)/873/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An order in a Civil Revision Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, where the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court directed the trial court to dispose of a pending arbitration opinion within two months, holding that notice to respondents is not necessary.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Principal District Court, Madurai to dispose of Arbitration O.P.No.6 of 2010 within two months from receipt of a copy of the order.

Malliga Begum Vs the Union of India — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 17.04.2014

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.MATHIVANAN

¶5

C.R.P(MD)No.873 of 2014 (PD)

¶6

Malliga Begum .. Petitioner/Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1)The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Road, Transport and Highway Department, New Delhi.

¶9

2)The District Collector-cum-Arbitrator National Highways, Land Acquisition, Madurai.

¶10

3)The Competent Authority & District Revenue Officer, Madurai.

¶11

4)The Project Officer, National Highways Authority of India, No.44, I Floor, Pon Nagar, III Main Road, Trichy. .. Respondents/Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Civil Revision Petition is filed, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, to direct the Principal District & Sessions Court, Madurai to dispose of the Arbitration O.P.No.6 of 2010 within a definite time framed by this Hon'ble Court and pleased to allow the Civil Revision Petition.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Arumugam

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner is seeking a direction to the Principal District & Sessions Court, Madurai to dispose of the Arbitration https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O.P.No.6 of 2010 within the specified time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶16

¶17

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record carefully.

¶18

3.No notice is necessary to the respondents as this Court indend to direct the trial Court to dispose of the suit at the earliest and it would not cause any prejudice to the respondents.

¶19

4.Considering the fact that the Arbitration O.P. was filed in the year 2010 and written statement was filed on 27.6.2011, this Court directs the learned Principal District Court, Madurai to dispose of the Arbitration O.P.No.6 of 2010, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, without loss of further time. There is no order as to costs.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

Assistant Registrar(Crl.side)

¶22

/True Copy/

¶23

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶24

¶25

The Principal District Judge, Madurai

¶26

+1cc to M/s.Ajmal Associates, Advocate, in SR. No.24502.

¶27

C.R.P(MD)No.873 of 2014(PD)

17.04.2014

msm 09.05.2014 p2/3c

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Malliga Begum v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malliga Begum v. the Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Deepan Subakar, Vs P.Kamuthayee

Thiyagarajan, Vs Ganga Bai

Saraswathi, Vs Pandiammal

Subbaiah, S/O. Muthukonar, Vs Nagarajan

Majibha Banu, Vs the Union of India, Rep. by

A.Charles Raja Vs P.Subha Francis