Dismissed

The Management v. C.Subramanian (Deased) 1.S.LAKSHMI

Madras HC22 Feb 2024REV.APLC(MD)/21/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court dismissed a review petition filed against a writ execution order dated 21.12.2023 on the ground that grounds were raised on merits. The court nonetheless directed the judgment debtor to pay Rs. 3,00,000 compensation to specific respondents within two months.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 1 to 3 to pay compensation of Rs. 3,00,000 within two months; review application dismissed; connected M.P. closed.

The Management Vs C.Subramanian (Deased) 1.S.LAKSHMI — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.02.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024 in W.A.(MD) No.1191 of 2022 and C.M.P.(MD) No.1580 of 2024

¶7

The Management, Sri Nachammai Cotton Mills, Chettinad, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

¶8

... Review Applicant/Appellant

¶9

Vs.

¶10

C.Subramanian (Deceased)

1.S.Lakshmi

2.S.Chockkalingam

3.S.Rathna

4.The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madurai.

¶15

... Respondents /Respondents

¶16

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

¶17

1/4

¶18

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024

¶19

Prayer :- Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 114 of C.P.C., praying to review the order dated 21.12.2023 passed in W.A.(MD)No.1191 of 2022 and allow the Review Application.

¶20

For Petitioner : Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

¶23

The review petition has been instituted to review the order dated 21.12.2023 passed in W.A.(MD)No.1191 of 2022.

¶24

The grounds raised in the present review application are on merits not entertainable and beyond the scope of review. Re-adjudication of the issues on merits in a review proceedings are impermissible.

¶25

However the petitioner/appellant shall pay the compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Only), as awarded by this Court, to the

¶26

respondents 1 to 3, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶27

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

¶28

2/4

¶29

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024

¶30

Accordingly , the review application stands dismissed. However,

¶31

there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶32

(S.M.S.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.) 22.02.2024

¶33

Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No (sha)

¶34

¶35

The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madurai.

¶36

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

¶37

3/4

¶38

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024

¶39

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. and V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

¶40

(sha)

¶41

Review Application Civil (MD) No.21 of 2024

¶42

22.02.2024

¶43

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

¶44

4/4

The Management v. C.Subramanian (Deased) 1.S.LAKSHMI

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Management v. C.Subramanian (Deased) 1.S.LAKSHMI

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

S.T.Kalyanasundaram Vs The District Collector

The Secretary and Correspondent Vs Dr. M.Arunachalam

M/S. Sterling Holiday Resorts (India) Ltd., Vs S.R. Elangovan

Mummoorthi .S Vs the District Collector

Elephant G.Rajendran Vs The Commissioner

M.Muthuraman Vs Beevi Nurrani.K.S