The High Court of Madras dismissed a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as infructuous after the petitioner endorsed that the prayer had become infructuous. No order as to costs was passed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.12.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.31781 of 2005 and W.P.M.P.No.34839 of 2005
Mr.M.E.Hussain ..Petitioner
Vs.
M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Rep. by the Chief Divisional Retail Sales Manager, Chennai Divisional Office, No.500, Anna Salai, Chennai.
.. Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent / Corporation, their officials or anybody claiming through them from in any manner interfering with running of IOC CoCo retail outlet and the supply of stocks to the petitioner for running the IOC CoCo Retail Outlet at Padappai, Kancheepuram District.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Abdul Kader
For Respondent : Mr.V.Ananthanatarajan
O R D E R
The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the prayer in the Writ Petition has already become infructuous and he has also made an endorsement to that effect.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS VIII)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
pvs
To The Chief Divisional Retail Sales Manager, M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Chennai Divisional Office, No.500, Anna Salai, Chennai.
W.P.No.31781 of 2005
RSI(CO) SP(09/01/2019)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mr. M.E. Hussain
M/s. Indian Oil Corporation Limited
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
