Dismissed

Karuppaiah, S/O. Muniasamy, v. the District Collector

Madras HC7 Apr 2022WP(MD)/3990/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed three writ petitions and closed connected miscellaneous petitions on the ground that the petitioners had died long ago and their legal heirs showed no interest in proceeding with the litigation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed for default, with no costs awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.

Karuppaiah, S/O. Muniasamy, Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD)Nos.3990, 3991 and 3994 of 2009

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P.(MD)Nos.3990, 3991 and 3994 of 2009 and

¶5

M.P.(MD)Nos.3, 3 and 3 of 2009

¶6

Karuppaiah ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.3990 of 2009 Kasiammal ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.3991 of 2009 M.Deivani ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.3994 of 2009

¶7

versus

¶8

The District Collector, Tiruchirapalli District, Collectorate, Tiruchirapalli – 620 001.

¶9

District Revenue Officer (Rehabilitation) Collectorate, Tiruchirapalli – 620 001.

¶10

Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited having Head Office at Chennai and having its Branch Office at Tiruchirapalli, Rep. by its Business Development Manager, Tiruchirapalli I.T. Park having office at Collector Office Road, Tiruchirapalli - 620 001.

¶11

The Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Fort St. George, Chennai.

¶12

(R4 is impleaded vide order dated 23.02.2010) ... Respondents

¶13

Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to Survey Nos.310/1 in Navalpattu Village, Tiruchirapalli and quash the Government Order in Revenue (Ni.Mu.5(2)) Department) G.O.(Standing) No.15 dated 09.01.2007 and the ensuing proceedings of transfer made by the respondents 1 and 2 in favour of the third respondent and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant patta in the petitioners' names.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

1/3

¶16

W.P.(MD)Nos.3990, 3991 and 3994 of 2009

¶17

For Petitioner in all W.Ps. : Mr.S.K.Mani

¶18

For R1, R2&R4 : Mr.Veerakathiravan, in all W.Ps. Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.D.Gandhiraj, Special Government Pleader

¶19

For R3 in all W.Ps.: Mr.R.Sekaran

¶20

COMMON ORDER

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners died long back and despite his best effort, he could not contact the legal heirs of the deceased petitioners and therefore, he reports no instruction.

¶22

Considering the fact that the petitioners died long back and the legal heirs are not having interest to proceed with the writ petition, these writ petitions are dismissed for default. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶23

Assistant Registrar (Protocol)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

ogy

¶27

¶28

The District Collector, Tiruchirapalli District, Collectorate, Tiruchirapalli – 620 001.

¶29

The District Revenue Officer (Rehabilitation) Collectorate, Tiruchirapalli – 620 001.

¶30

The Secretary to Government, Department of Revenue, Fort St. George, Chennai.

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶32

2/3

¶33

W.P.(MD)Nos.3990, 3991 and 3994 of 2009

¶34

W.P.(MD)Nos.3990, 3991 and 3994 of 2009 07.04.2022

¶35

+1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-17487[F] dated 08/04/2022 )

¶36

RD(02.05.2022) 3P 5C

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶38

3/3

Karuppaiah, S/O. Muniasamy, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuppaiah, S/O. Muniasamy, v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Packia John Bright Vs the Senate of Serampore -

Microttrol Sterlization Vs the Union of India, through

Somasundar, Vs the Tahsildar

Ponnazhagu, Vs the District Collector

M/S. Sree Kaderi Ambal Mills Vs the Tamilnadu Electricity

A. Nihila, Vs the Chairman and the