Dismissed

Raji David v. Chitra Devi

Madras HC29 Apr 2019WA/706/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Writ Appeal No. 706 of 2019, the Madras High Court dismissed the appeal for non-prosecution as the appellant failed to appear on three occasions pending disposal of the suit regarding an LPG distributorship. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petitions were closed.

What did the court decide?

Writ appeal dismissed for non-prosecution; connected civil miscellaneous petitions closed; no costs.

Raji David Vs Chitra Devi — Property and Title | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 29.04.2019

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

Writ Appeal No.706 of 2019 & C.M.P.Nos.5792, 5794 of 2019

¶7

Mrs.Raji David

¶8

...Appellant/Petitioner/Petitioner /2^nd Respondent

¶9

-vs-

¶10

Chitradevi ...1^st Respondent/1^st Respondent/Petitioner

¶11

The Senior Area Manager, Indian Oil Corporation, (Marketing Division) Indane Area Office, No.8/1079, Avinashi Road, Coimbatore.

¶12

...2^nd Respondent/2^nd Respondent/1^st Respondent

¶13

Prayer Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of this Court in W.M.P.No.39201 of 2018 in Review Sr.No.139943 of 2018 in W.P.No.5644 of 2012 dated 25.01.2019.

¶14

Prayer in WMP No.39201 of 2018: Praying to grant an order of Interim Injunction restraining the 2^nd respondent his men, servants, agents and nominees from any manner with the interfering of running the LPG Agencies in the name of style of M/S.Shares Maha Ganapathy Gas Service (Indane Distribution) situated at Holy Bhavan, First Floor, No.43, A2 FCI Road, Ganapathy Coimbatore 641 006 pending disposal of Rev.Appl Sr.No.139943/2018 and to condone the delay of 36 days for filing the Review Application.

¶15

Prayer in Rev.Appln.Sr139943/2018:

¶16

To review the order dated 05.09.2018 passed in W.P.No.5644/2012.

¶17

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

¶18

Prayer in W.P.No.5644 of 2012:

¶19

Writ of Mandamus for forbearing the 1st respondent from reconstituting or reorganizing M/s. Shree Mahaganapathy Gas Service Coimbatore the Indane Distributorship under the 1st respondent in favour of the 2nd respondent or her children until the disposal of the suit in O.S.No.151/2009 on the file of District Munsif Court Bodinayakkanur.

¶20

For appellant : Mr.K.Rajendra Prasad
For respondents: Mr.Nambi Arooran for
M/s.Ajmal Associates.
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the
order of this Court in W.M.P.No.39201 of 2018 in Review
Sr.No.139943 of 2018 in W.P.No.5644 of 2012 dated 25.01.2019.
2. This is the third occasion on which the appellant is not
present. Hence the appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.
3. In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed for non-
prosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected civil
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VI)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
Writ Appeal No. 706 of 2019
&
C.M.P.Nos.5792, 5794 of 2019
mr[co]
srg 01/07/2019

¶21

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

Raji David v. Chitra Devi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raji David v. Chitra Devi

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

The Management Vs Stalin Josephraj

M/S Palani Andavar Trading Company Vs the Assistant Commissioner (Ct)

V.Manikandaraju Vs Additional Commissioner

State Bank of India, Vs S.Chandrasekaran

The Managing Director Vs Mangayarkarasi

Asianet Satellite Communications Ltd. Vs L.Meenakshi Sundram