Petitioners sought to set aside proceedings in DV.No.10 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri, under Article 227. Counsel sought leave to withdraw with an endorsement; the High Court permitted withdrawal and dismissed the revision petition as withdrawn.
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.
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.04.2024
Coram
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022 & C.M.P.No.4999 of 2022
1.Duraisamy 2.Lakshmi
... Petitioners
-Versus-
Shamugapriya @ Arthi ... Respondent
Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the proceedings made in DV.No.10 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Krishnagiri.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Jayachandran For Respondent : No appearance
ORDER
Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to
withdraw this petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the
1 of 4
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022
court bundle.
29.04.2024
nl Index : yes / no Neutral Citation : yes / no Speaking / Non Speaking Order
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022
To
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022
nl
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
C.R.P.(PD).No.969 of 2022 & C.M.P.No.4999 of 2022
29.04.2024
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Duraisamy
Lakshmi
Shamugapriya @ Arthi
V. Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
