Dismissed

P. Indumathi @ Indurani v. the District Collector

Madras HC10 Oct 2022WP/2497/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners approached the Madras High Court via Writ Petition No. 2497 of 2009 seeking a Writ of Certiorari against the patta issued in favour of the fifth respondent. The petition was dismissed due to non-prosecution as the petitioner and counsel were absent on the date of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed for non-prosecution; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

P. Indumathi @ Indurani Vs the District Collector — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.No.2497 of 2009

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10.10.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

W.P.No.2497 of 2009 and M.P.Nos.1 to 4 of 2009

¶7

P.Indumathi @ Indurani

¶8

P.Pradeep Kumar ... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The District Collector, Chennai Collectorate, Singaravelar Maaligai,

¶11

Chennai – 600 001.

¶12

The Tahsildar, Guindy Mambalam Taluk, K.K. Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

¶13

The Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Chennai.

¶14

The Joint Registrar – I, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.

¶15

Geethalakshmi ... Respondents

¶16

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in respect of patta in CA No.805/2006-07 to and in favour of Geethalakshmi, the 5^th respondent herein and quash the same.

¶17

1/4

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.2497 of 2009

¶20

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Kumara Raja (No appearance) For Respondents : Mr.T.K.Saravanan Government Advocate [R1 to R4] R5- dismissed for default [17.08.2015]

¶21

ORDER

¶22

When the Writ Petition was taken up for hearing on 29.09.2022, there

¶23

was no representation for the petitioner and hence, the matter was ordered to

¶24

be listed today, under the caption 'for dismissal '.

¶25

2.Even though, the matter is listed today under the caption 'for

¶26

dismissal', neither the petitioner nor his counsel is present to prosecute the matter. Hence the Writ Petition is dismissed for non prosecution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

10.10.2022

RAP

The District Collector, Chennai Collectorate, Singaravelar Maaligai, Chennai – 600 001.

¶31

2/4

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.2497 of 2009

¶34

The Tahsildar, Guindy Mambalam Taluk, K.K. Nagar, Chennai – 600 078.

¶35

The Superintendent of Police, CBCID, Chennai.

¶36

The Joint Registrar – I, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.

¶37

3/4

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.No.2497 of 2009

¶40

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

¶41

RAP

¶42

W.P.No.2497 of 2009

¶43

10.10.2022

¶44

4/4

¶45

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

P. Indumathi @ Indurani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Indumathi @ Indurani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M. Neelakandan Vs the Special Commissioner and

A.S.Gunasekaran Vs Niranjan Mardi IAS

J.B.Israel Vs the District Collector

Muralidharan, Vs The Commissioner and

M.Elankumran Vs the Secretary to Govt.

N. Hemraj Dugar, Vs The Government of Tamilnadu