G.Narayanan v. E.Palani
Case brief
What is this about?
Civil Revision Petition dismissing an application to reopen a closed Advocate Commissioner appointment. The court found the delay of 19 months unexplained and refused interference with the trial court's order.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition dismissed, impugned order confirmed, no costs awarded.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.02.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR
CRP (PD) No.2210 of 2017
G.Narayanan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.E.Palani
2.The Block Development Officer,
Walajabad,
Kanchipuram Taluk.
3.The President,
Elakkaimangalam Panchayat,
Elakkaimangalam Village,
Panruti Post,
Kanchipuram Taluk. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India against the fair and decreetal order of the Learned Additional District Munsif, Kanchipuram in I.A.No.299 of 2016
in O.S.No.120 of 2012 dated 31.01.2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Kuyilan For R1 : Mr.S.Baskar For R3 : No appearance * * * * *
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the lower court's dismissal of an application to reopen an Advocate Commissioner report filed after a delay of 19 months without reasonable cause.
Whether the delay in filing an application to reopen a closed interim order merits correction by the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
G.Narayanan
- respondent
E.Palani
- respondent
The Block Development Officer, Walajabad
- respondent
The President, Elakkaimangalam Panchayat
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court