Gomathi v. Gandhi
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court dismissed the civil revision petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without calling for reasons due to delay in hearing an interlocutory application. It directed the trial court to dispose of the interim application within a fortnight to prevent further delay.
What did the court decide?
The trial court directed to dispose of I.A.No.559 of 2016 in O.S.No.46 of 2016 within a fortnight.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 03.04.2017
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
C.R.P.(PD) No.1198 of 2017
1.Gomathi
2.Muthu ..Petitioners
Vs.
1.Gandhi
2.The District Collector, Villupuram District, Villupuram.
3.The Tahsildar, Sankarapuram Taluk Office, Sankarapuram, Villupuram District. .. Respondents
The Civil Revision has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether notice to respondents is necessary in a civil revision petition where direction is to dispose of an interlocutory application within a fortnight.
Whether the trial court direction to dismiss interlocutory application within a fortnight is sufficient to dispose of the civil revision petition.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Gomathi
- petitioner
Muthu
- respondent
Gandhi
- respondent
The District Collector, Villupuram District
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Sankarapuram Taluk Office
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court