Allowed

The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Urban v. Rathnasomasundaram

Madras HC27 Nov 2024CMP/15073/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court condoned extraordinary delays of 1133 and 917 days in filing writ appeals by two groups of government officials. Bona fides were accepted, and a fee of Rs. 5,000 was imposed on each petitioner to be paid within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitions to condone delay in filing writ appeals were allowed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000 to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority within two weeks.

The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022 in W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 27.11.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. DHANABAL

¶8

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022

¶9

¶10

W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶11

1.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Urban Land Ceiling and Urban Land Tax, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

¶12

2.The Assistant Commissioner, Urban Land Ceiling, Ambattur zone, No.5, Sannathi Street, Poonamallee, Chennai - 600 056.

¶13

3.The Tahsildar, Ambattur, Chennai - 600 058.

¶14

... Petitioners in both petitions

¶15

Vs.

¶16

1.RathnaSomasundaram 2.T.A.Manjula

¶17

... Respondents in C.M.P.No.15073 of 2022

¶18

Page 1

¶19

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

¶20

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022 in W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶21

1.V.Somasundaram 2.RathnaSomasundaram

¶22

... Respondents in C.M.P.No.15510 of 2022

¶23

Prayer in C.M.P.No.15073 of 2022 : Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 1133 days in filing the Writ Appeal in W.A.SR.No.107064 of 2021.

¶24

Prayer in W.A.SR.No.107064 of 2021 : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 08.04.2019 made in W.P.No.31742 of 2018.

¶25

Prayer in C.M.P.No.15510 of 2022 : Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act to condone the delay of 917 days in filing the Writ Appeal in W.A.SR.No.107156 of 2021.

¶26

Prayer in W.A.SR.No.107156 of 2021 : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 08.04.2019 made in W.P.No.31738 of 2018.

¶27

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader in both petitions For Respondents : Mr.V.G.Suresh Kumar in both petitions

¶28

Page 2

¶29

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

¶30

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022 in W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶31

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶32

(Order of the Court was made by S.S. SUNDAR, J. )

¶33

These Civil Miscellaneous Petitions are filed to condone the delay of 1133 days and 917 days respectively in filing the above Writ Appeals.

¶34

2.Even though the delay is inordinate and there is no explanation for each and every day's delay, reading of the affidavit filed in support of the petitions indicates that the delay is due to administrative reasons, which, according to the petitioners, cannot be discarded for reasons. However, this Court is unable to doubt the bona fides of the petitioners/appellants.

¶35

3.In the said circumstances, the delay is condoned and these petitions are ordered subject to condition that the petitioners pay a sum of Rs.5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand only) to the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority, Madras High Court Campus, Chennai - 600 104, in each petition, within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.

¶36

(S.S.S.R., J.) (P.D.B., J.) 27.11.2024

mkn

Internet : Yes

Page 3

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

¶41

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022 in W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶42

S.S. SUNDAR, J. and P. DHANABAL, J.

¶43

mkn

¶44

C.M.P.Nos.15073 & 15510 of 2022 in W.A.SR.Nos.107064 & 107156 of 2021

¶45

27.11.2024

¶46

Page 4

¶47

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

The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Urban v. Rathnasomasundaram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Special Commissioner and Commissioner for Urban v. Rathnasomasundaram

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

Lancor Holdings Ltd. Vs the Future Management and Consultancy (P) Ltd.

Sarvothaman Vs The Registrar General

High court Madras, Vs R. Anandan, and 10 others

Binny Limited Vs Rajiv Bakshi

K.Shanmughasundaram Vs J.Catherine

Central Board of Trustees Vs the Deputy Registrar