Disposed

P.Soundara Pandiyan v. the Principal District Judge

Madras HC16 Oct 2019WA(MD)/1033/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

By consent, the Madurai Bench disposed of a writ appeal challenging an order directing reconstruction of documents. The Court held that reconstructing documents safeguards the appellant's interests and such documents must be treated as original.

What did the court decide?

Writ Appeal disposed by directing Principal District Court to facilitate reconstruction of documents; no order as to costs.

P.Soundara Pandiyan Vs the Principal District… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.A.[MD]No.1033 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.10.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE R.THARANI W.A.[MD]No.1033 of 2019

¶5

P.Soundara Pandiyan : Appellants

¶6

Vs.

¶7

1.The Principal District Judge, Madurai District Court, Madurai.

¶8

2.The Sheristadar,

¶9

District and Sessions Court, Trichy.

¶10

3.The Sheristadar,

¶11

District and Sessions Court, Madurai. : Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order of the learned Single Judge dated 28.02.2019 made in W.P.[MD]No.18643 of 2017 on the file of this Court.

¶13

Prayer in WP(MD). 18643/ 2017 :

¶14

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of mandamus for a direction directing the 1st respondent to conduct and enquiry on non availability of certain documents as per the petitioners letter dated 08.05.2017 in case records in O.S.No.168/2007 on the file of Honble Principal district Court, Madurai and pass any other appropriate orders in the facts and circumstances of the case and thus render Justice.

¶15

For Appellant : Mr.T.Vadivelan

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

¶18

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶19

By consent of both parties, the Writ Appeal is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶20

2.We have heard Mr.T.Vadivelan, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant.

¶21

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

¶22

1/4

¶23

W.A.[MD]No.1033 of 2019

¶24

3.After perusing the order passed in the writ petition, we find that the direction issued by the learned Writ Court to reconstruct the documents will sufficiently safeguard the interest of the appellant. We make it clear that the validity of the documents shall not be discredited, merely because it has been reconstructed and it should be taken to be as if the documents are original in nature.

¶25

4.The Principal District Court is requested to direct both parties to take steps to reconstruct the documents to enable the Court to proceed with the matter.

¶26

5.With these observations, we dispose of this Writ Appeal. However there shall be no order as to costs.

¶27

Assistant Registrar (cco) // True Copy //

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶29

¶30

¶31

1.The Principal District Judge, Madurai District Court, Madurai.

¶32

2.The Sheristadar, District and Sessions Court, Trichy.

¶33

3.The Sheristadar, District and Sessions Court, Madurai.

¶34

Copy to

¶35

The Registrar (Judicial) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶36

The Additional Registrar Genral, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶37

Judgment made in W.A.[MD]No.1033 of 2019 Dated : 16.10.2019

¶38

VB(08.11.2019) 2P 6C

¶39

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

¶40

2/4

P.Soundara Pandiyan v. the Principal District Judge

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Soundara Pandiyan v. the Principal District Judge

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

Managing Director Vs N.Govindaraj

The Executive Officer Vs G.Ramakrishnan

The Commissioner of Customs Vs M. Natarajan

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs S.Karthikeyan

Muthukumar Vs The Managing Director

S.R.Kirutholi Alias Rajamohamed Vs the Director of Municipal Administration