M.Durai v. M.Loganathan
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court, Madras dismissed a Civil Revision Petition merely as it was no longer pressed by the petitioner's counsel, who had endorsed it against. No legal principles were laid down and the case is purely procedural.
What did the court decide?
Civil Revision Petition dismissed as not pressed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19.11.2019 CORAM : The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
C.R.P.No.1907 of 2010 and M.P.No.1 of 2010
M.Durai ... Petitioner/5th Respondent/5th Defendant Vs. 1.M.Loganathan 2.T.S.P.Chandran 3.Lalitha Balachandran 4.K.Dhanapal M.Vadivel (Died) 5.M.Selvi 6.Minor Amsapriya 7.Minor Muthu 8.Minor Swapnadevi 9.Kokila ... Respondents (minors R6 to R8 rep by mother & guardian, next friend R5)
Prayer:Civil Revision Petition filed under Article227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 17.12.2009 passed in I.A.No.1231 of 2009 in O.S.No.10 of 2008 on the file of the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Salem.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Jagadeesan For Respondents: Mr.M.Ahmed Zuber (R5 to R8 – minors rep by R5) Mr.M.Devaraj (R1) R2 to R4 & R9 – not ready in notice O R D E R
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner made an endorsement not pressing the Civil Revision Petition.
2.In view of the same, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed as not pressed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS)
//True Copy//
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M. Durai
- respondent
1. M. Loganathan
- respondent
2. T.S.P. Chandran
- respondent
3. Lalitha Balachandran
- respondent
5. M. Selvi
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court