B.Munusamy v. the Tahsildar
Case brief
What is this about?
The petitioner's writ petition seeking a survey of his property was dismissed for non-prosecution as he and the respondents failed to appear on the listing date in the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
What did the court decide?
The writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. The connected miscellaneous petition (M.P. No. 1 of 2013) was closed.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 03.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
W.P.No. 20116 of 2013
and
M.P.No.1 of 2013
B.Munusamy ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Tahsildar,
Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk,
Chennai - 28.
2.Matchagandhi @ Mohana
3.S.Manikandan ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to survey the petitioner's property bearing Chennai Corporation Door No.11, Plot No.59, V.R.Pillai Street, Hanumanthapuram, Triplicane, Chennai - 5, measuring about 441 sq.ft (41.0 sq.mte), situate in Block No.18, Survey T.S.No.959/1 & 957 part, Mylapore Village, Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk, Chennai District based on the petitioner's representation dated 13.05.13.
For Petitioner : No appearance For Respondents : Mr.P.Purushothaman Government Advocate for R1
ORDER
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the failure of the petitioner to appear on the hearing date.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
B.Munusamy
- respondent
The Tahsildar, Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk, Chennai
- respondent
Matchagandhi @ Mohana
- respondent
S.Manikandan
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court