The Special Tahsildar v. Pushpavathi Bai
Case brief
What is this about?
13728, 13729, 13731, 13732, 13733, 13735…
A compact analysis
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.
CMP Nos.13726, 13728, 13729, 13731, 13732, 13733, 13735, 13736,13737, 13738, and 13739 of 2020
in A.S.SR.Nos.77813, 77814, 77815, 77816, 77817, 77818, 77819, 77820, 77821, 77823, and 77824 2020
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J
These petitions are filed to condone the delay of 1773 days in filing the appeals.
- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
3.Ms.S.S.Meenakumary, learned counsel appearing for the respondents have no objection in allowing these applications.
- Having satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavits filed in support of the petitions, the delay is condoned and the petitions are ordered.
- Registry is directed to print the name of M/s D.Balachandran, S.S.Meenakumary and S.Saravanan for the respondents.
- Registry is directed to number the appeals, if they are otherwise in order and post on 27.04.2021.
19.04.2021
sr
Coram
Krishnan Ramasamy J
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court