K.Pannerselvam v. the Member
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madurai Bench dismissed the writ petition for default due to the non-appearance of the petitioner, assuming no subsisting interest to prosecute the matter.
What did the court decide?
Application to set aside the dismissal of the original writ petition was dismissed due to absence of well-appreared party.
What the court decided
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Special Original Jurisdiction )
Thursday, the Twenty Third day of June Two Thousand Sixteen
PRESENT
The Honble Mr.Justice NOOTY. RAMAMOHANA RAO and The Honble Mr.Justice S.S.SUNDAR
WMP(MD) No.8393 of 2016 IN WP(MD) No.17483 of 2015
K.PANNERSELVAM ... PETITIONER/PETITIONER
Vs
- 1 THE MEMBER HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF TAMILNADU, CHENNAI-600 028
- 2 THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, VIRUDHUNAGAR,
- 3 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT. ... RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS
Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to restore WP No.17483 of 2015 which was dismissed for default on 28.09.2015 on the file of this Honble Court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
K.PANNERSELVAM
- respondent
THE MEMBER HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION OF TAMILNADU, CHENNAI-600 028
- respondent
THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, VIRUDHUNAGAR
- respondent
THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE VIRUDHUNAGAR DISTRICT
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court