This order addressed connected writ petitions filed for lease renewal against the Ramanathapuram Municipality. The court dismissed them as infructuous based on a prior order made in a connected petition, granting no costs and closing related miscellaneous petitions.
The writ petitions were dismissed as infructuous.
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 :02.07.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.Nos.17666 to 17668 of 2004 and WPMP.Nos.21016 and 21018 of 2004
...Petitioner in W.P.Nos.17666 and 17667 of 2004
...Petitioner in W.P.No.17668 of 2004
vs
.. Respondents in all Wps.
Prayer in WP.Nos.17666 and 17667 of 2004 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the resolution No.614 dated 26.05.2004 passed by the second respondent and quash the same in so far as it is concerned with the writ petitioners Shop No.3 and 7 Situate outside, Anna Bus Stand, Ramanathapuram which was leased out to the writ petitioner and
direct the first respondent to renew the lease in favour of the petitioner for a further period of 3 years on accepting the enhanced lease amount at 15 % over and above the existing lease amount in respect of the Shop No.3 and 7 Situate outside, Anna Bus Stand, Ramanathapuram.
Prayer in WP.No.17668 of 2004: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the resolution No.614 dated 26.05.2004 passed by the second respondent and quash the same in so far as it is concerned with the writ petitioners Shop No.1, Adam Jewellery of Southern Side Commercial Shop, Salai Street, Ramanathapuram which was leased out to the writ petitioner and direct the first respondent to renew the lease in favour of the petitioner for a further period of 3 years on accepting the enhanced lease amount at 15 % over and above the existing lease amount in respect of the Shop No.1, Adam Jewellery, Southern Side Commercial Shop, Salai Street, Ramanathapuram.
For Petitioners : Mr. R. Prasanan For Respondents : Mrs. K. Bhuvaneswari
Learned counsel for the petitioners has made an endorsement as follows:
"Since the lease period was over, there was an order in the connected Writ Petitions 18014/2004 to 18017 /04 by his Lordship. Justice Vaidayanathan. The same order stating that "The prayer became infructuous and the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same if any cause of action survives" may be passed"
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
To
+1 CC to Mr.C.R. Prasanan, Advocate sr 55250.
W.P.Nos.17666 to 17668 of 2004 and WPMP.Nos.21016 and 21018 of 2004
GP(CO) SP(08/08/2019)
M. S. Jainulabdeen
Abdul Munaaf
The Commissioner, Ramanathapuram Municipality
The Vice Chairman and Acting Chariman, Ramanathapuram Municipality
M. Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
