The High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking correction of a registration endorsement. The petition was dismissed for non-prosecution as the petitioner's counsel failed to appear on multiple adjournment dates.
Dismissal of Writ Petition for non-prosecution.
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: 01.10.2020
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DURAISWAMY
W.P.NO.17444 OF 2013 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2013
M.Ramar ... Petitioner
Vs.
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to remove the erroneous endorsement in volume 1812 page no.133 to 146 of Book – 1 pertaining to registered Sale Document No.837 of 2006 on the file of the 2nd respondent.
Petitioner : Mr.M.Ramar – no appearance For Respondents : Mr.P.P.Purushothaman, Government Advocate (R1 & R2) R3 – no appearance
O R D E R
When the matter was listed for hearing on 20.07.2020, the learned counsel for the petitioner was not present, hence, the matter was adjourned to 27.07.2020. On 27.07.2020 also, there was no representation for the petitioner, hence, the matter was adjourned to 07.08.2020. When the matter was listed on 07.08.2020 also, the learned counsel for the petitioner was not present and hence, the matter was adjourned to 27.08.2020. On 27.08.2020 also, there was no representation for the petitioner, hence, the matter was adjourned to 25.09.2020. On 25.09.2020, Mr.R.Kumaravel, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that Mr.V.Arun, learned counsel, who had filed vakalat for the petitioner, has given change of vakalat and handed over the papers to the petitioner for engaging some other counsel as early as in the year 2015. Therefore, the Registry was directed to verify whether any counsel had filed change of vakalat on behalf of the petitioner, if so, to print the name of the counsel who had filed change of vakalat on behalf of the petitioner, if not, to print the name of the petitioner and list the matter on 29.09.2020. On verification, the Registry informed that no counsel had filed change of vakalat on behalf of the petitioner. On 29.09.2020, though the name of the petitioner was printed in the cause list, none appeared for him, hence, the Registry was directed to list the matter “for dismissal” on 01.10.2020. Though the matter has been listed under the caption “for dismissal”, printing the name of the petitioner, none appeared for him. Hence, this Court has no other option, except to dismiss the Writ Petition for nonprosecution. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CO)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
va
To
W.P.No.17444 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013
SVI(CO) CS/03/11/2020
M. Ramar
The District Registrar, Registration Department, Ariyalur
The Sub Registrar, Perambalur
Chellam
M. Duraiswamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
