Allowed

M. Aruna v. S.A. Salamath Begum

Madras HC26 Oct 2017OSA/132/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed the respondents to withdraw their Original Application in O.A.No.752 of 2016. Consequently, the impugned order dated 19.01.2017 was set aside. The appeal in O.S.A.No.132 of 2017 and the connected CMP were disposed of, leaving issues open for the appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Permitted respondents to withdraw O.A.No.752 of 2016, set aside the order dated 19.01.2017, disposed appeal, and closed CMP.No.8706 of 2017.

M. Aruna Vs S.A. Salamath Begum — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 26.10.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH and THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶5

O.S.A.No.132 of 2017

¶6

and CMP.No.8706 of 2017

¶7

M.Aruna, Proprietrix, M/s.MTG Enterprises, No.4, 5^th Main Road, Kannan Nagar, Madipakkam, Chennai – 600 091. .. Appellant vs 1.S.A.Salamath Begum 2.A.A.Abdul Khaliq 3.A.A.Abdul Raziq 4.Mafaz Mohammed 5.Zahira Shaw 6.Fathimathu Fakiha, 7.Fazeela Shafiq 8.Naseema Beevi 10.Shafiq Mohamed Shah 11.Zarook Syed Shah 12.Kathijathu Nasreen 13.Aminath Sithi Mariam 14.Faiza Hameed .. Respondents

¶8

(Respondents 1 to 8 & 10 to 14 represented by their duly constituted Power Agent Safiq Mohammed Shah)

¶9

Appeal filed under Order XXXVI, Rule 9 of Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 19.01.2017 in O.A.No.752 of 2016 on the file of this Court.

¶10

For Appellant .. Mr.N.S.Mohamed Habeeb Raja for M/s.Arulselvam Associates For Respondents .. Mr.V.Kuberan for M/s.Rank Associates

¶11

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

¶12

JUDGMENT

¶13

(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

¶14

After some arguments, Mr.V.Kuberan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that application being O.A.No.752 of 2016 filed by the respondents before the learned Single Judge may be permitted to be withdrawn, leaving all the issues open to be decided by the appropriate forum. Learned counsel for the respondents has also made an endorsement.

¶15

Considering the above said submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents, we permit the respondents to withdraw O.A.No.752 of 2016.

¶16

Accordingly, we make it clear that the order of the learned Single Judge made in O.A.No.752 of 2016 dated 19.01.2017 stands set aside. All the issues are left open to be decided before the appropriate pending proceedings/appropriate forum.

¶17

The appeal is, thus, disposed of in terms aforesaid, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. Consequently, CMP.No.8706 of 2017 is closed.

¶18

Sd/Asst.Registrar (CS V ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar bbr To

¶19

The Sub Assistant Registrar, Original Side, High Court, Madras.

¶20

1 cc to M/s.Rank Associates, Advocate,SR.75991 + 1 cc to M/s.Arulselvam Associates, Advocate,SR.76046

¶21

CP(CO) NR 13/10/2017

¶22

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

M. Aruna v. S.A. Salamath Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Aruna v. S.A. Salamath Begum

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nalini Vs P.Ramakrishnan

Ved Prakash (Authorized Vs P.Ponram Managing Partner

Befesa Agua, Sau Vs Ivrcl Infrastructure and

L.T.a.Peter Rayan, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Malu Sleepers Ltd., Vs the Union of India

Auroville Foundation Vs Ramaniyam Real Estates