The appellant sought to withdraw the writ appeal filed under the Madras Letters Patent against an order quashing an injunction. The court granted leave to withdraw and dismissed the appeal accordingly.
The writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
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.
W.A.[MD]No.10 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 07.11.2019 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.VINEET KOTHARI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.A.[MD]No.10 of 2019 and C.M.P.[MD]No.62 of 2019
Ashraf Ali
: Appellant/Petitioner/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
3.Ameer Mohaideen
4.Seeni Syed Beevi : Respondents/Respondents/Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 17.12.2018 passed in W.M.P.[MD] No.22344 of 2018 in W.P.[MD]No.24632 of 2018 and thereby allowing this Writ Appeal.
Prayer in WMP(MD). 22344/ 2018 :
To pass an order of Injunction restraining the respondents 1 and 2 from cancelling or declaring as void the settlement deed dated 29/12/2017 registered as Document No.66 of 2018 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Rajasingamangalam, Ramanathapuram Dist, pending disposal of the writ petition.
Prayer in WP(MD). 24632/ 2018 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying that declaring that the respondents 1 and 2 have no jurisdiction, power and authority to cancel or to declare as void the settlement deed dated 29/12/2017 registered as Document No.66 of 2018 on the file of the Sub Registrar, Rajasingamangalam, Ramanathapuram District under Section 23 (1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
For Appellant : Mr.T.R.Jeyapalam For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.A.K.Baskara Pandian
Special Government Pleader
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondents 3 & 4 : Mr.R.R.Thamathar Raj
1/2
W.A.[MD]No.10 of 2019
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by The Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice]
The learned counsel for the appellant seeks leave of the Court to withdraw the writ appeal. He has also made an endorsement. Opposite counsel has no objection.
2.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (records)
// True Copy //
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )
MR/MPK
To
1.The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District.
+1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-96975[F] dated 08/11/2019 )
+1 CC to Mr.T.R JEYAPALAM, Advocate ( SR-97212[F] dated 11/11/2019 )
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.[MD]No.10 of 2019 Dated : 07.11.2019
MK (18.12.2019) 2P 5C
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal filed by the appellant should be allowed or dismissed.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ashraf Ali
The District Collector, Ramanathapuram District
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Ramanathapuram District
Ameer Mohaideen
Seeni Syed Beevi
DR.VINEET KOTHARI
G.R.SWAMINATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
