Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

M.Shanthi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
M.Shanthi Vs the State of Tamil NaduM.Shanthi v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Allowed¶37

M.Shanthi v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC3 Feb 2025CMP/1751/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Death of appellants pending writ appeal; acceptance of cause title; legal heirs not brought on record; dismissal of writ appeal qua deceased (8th, 11th, 14th) appellants at SR stage; Madras High Court; CMP No. 1751 of 2025; WA SR No. 167656 of 2024; M.Shanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu; Department of Adi-Dravidar and Scheduled Tribes Welfare; Salem District respondents.

What did the court decide?

The Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title (recording the deaths of the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants pending the Writ Appeal) was ordered; consequently, the Writ Appeal qua the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants was dismissed at the SR stage itself, as their legal heirs were not sought to be brought on record. ¶37

Why is it important?

In light of the deaths of the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants, the Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title is ordered. ¶37

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title (recording the deaths of the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants pending the Writ Appeal) was ordered; consequently, the Writ Appeal qua the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants was dismissed at the SR stage itself, as their legal heirs were not sought to be brought on record.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title — recording that the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants died pending the Writ Appeal — should be allowed, and with what consequence for the Writ Appeal given that their legal heirs are not being brought on record.

Court's answer

In light of the deaths of the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants, the Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title is ordered.

Ratio / Principle

Since learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased 8th, 11th and 14th appellants to pursue the Writ Appeal, the Writ Appeal qua those appellants is dismissed even at the SR stage itself.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

M.Shanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu (High Court of Judicature at Madras, 03-02-2025, Anita Sumanth & C.Kumarappan JJ.) — CMP No. 1751 of 2025 in WA SR No. 167656 of 2024: The Court recorded that the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants had died pending the Writ Appeal. The Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title recording their deaths was ordered; and since learned counsel did not wish to bring their legal heirs on record to pursue the appeal, the Writ Appeal qua those three appellants was dismissed even at the SR stage itself.

A

CMP NO. 1751 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03-02-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

CMP NO. 1751 of 2025

AND WA SR NO. 167656 OF 2024

M.Shanthi

Res. at Ward No. 13, Arunthathiyar Colony, Thammampatti, Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District and 12 Others

Appellant(s)

Vs

The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary Department of Adi-Dravidar and Scheduled Tribes Welfare, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009 and 3 Others

Respondent(s)

WA SR NO. 167656 of 2024

M.Shanthi

Appellant(s)

Vs

The State Of Tamil Nadu

Respondent(s)

CMP NO. 1751 of 2025

For Appellant(s):

Ms.M.Sangamithirai, For Mr.S.Senthilnathan For Respondent(s):

Mr.M.Murali, Govt.Advocate For R1 To R4. WA SR NO. 167656 of 2024

For Appellant(s):

Ms.M.Sangamithirai, For Mr.S.Senthilnathan For Respondent(s):

MR.M.MURALI, GOVT.ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R4.

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

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Anita Sumanth J.)

We are given to understand that three of the appellants, i.e., 8^th ,11^th and 14^th are no

more and the present Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking acceptance of cause title

by mentioning that 8^th ,11^th and 14^th appellants have died pending Writ Appeal.

In light of the aforesaid and since learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to

bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased 8^th ,11^th and 14^th appellants to pursue the

Writ Appeal, this Miscellaneous Petition is ordered and the Writ Appeal qua 8^th ,11^th

and 14^th appellants is dismissed even at the SR stage itself.

(ANITA SUMANTH J.) (C.KUMARAPPAN J.) 03-02-2025

sl

CMP NO. 1751 of 2025

To

The State Of Tamil Nadu

Rep. by its Secretary Department of Adi-Dravidar and Scheduled Tribes Welfare, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009

The District Collector Salem District

The District Adi Dravidar and Schedule Tribes Welfare Office, Salem District

The Special Thasildar Department of Adi-Dravidar Welfare, Attur, Salem District WA SR NO. 167656 of 2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1. The State Of Tamil Nadu

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title — recording that the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants died pending the Writ Appeal — should be allowed, and with what consequence for the Writ Appeal given that their legal heirs are not being brought on record.¶33
The court held
In light of the deaths of the 8th, 11th and 14th appellants, the Miscellaneous Petition seeking acceptance of the cause title is ordered.ratio¶37

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
The 8th, 11th and 14th appellants died while the Writ Appeal was pending, and the present Miscellaneous Petition was filed seeking acceptance of the cause title recording their deaths.¶34
Prior proceeding
Learned counsel for the petitioner did not wish to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased 8th, 11th and 14th appellants to pursue the Writ Appeal.¶35

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
M.Shanthi and 12 Others¶11
Ms.M.Sangamithirai, Mr.S.Senthilnathan
respondent
The State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary Department of Adi-Dravidar and Scheduled Tribes Welfare, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009 and 3 Others¶14
Mr.M.Murali, Govt.Advocate
appellant
M.Shanthi¶17
Ms.M.Sangamithirai, Mr.S.Senthilnathan
respondent
The State Of Tamil Nadu¶20
MR.M.MURALI, GOVT.ADVOCATE

Coram

AI extract

Dr Justice Anita Sumanthauthor¶31
Justice C.Kumarappanmember¶7

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 3 Feb 2025 · February
Registered: 27 Jan 2025
Case no.: CMP/1751/2025
CNR: HCMA012459162024
Bench: Anita Sumanth C.kumarappan
Disposal: ORDERED
Case type: CMP

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Anita Sumanth C.kumarappan

The Real Estate Regulatory Authority Vs S.M.Syed Abdul Khader
3 Feb 2025
R. Shamili @ Shamili Devi Vs M. Sarada Devi
3 Feb 2025
Tvl. S.v.Sivalinga Nadar &Sons Vs the State of Tamil Nadu
4 Feb 2025

Cite this judgement

M.Shanthi v. the State of Tamil Nadu, CMP/1751/2025 (MAD), decided on 3 February 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Procedural history2

The 8th, 11th and 14th appellants died while the Writ Appeal was pending, and the present Miscellaneous Petition was filed seeking acceptance of the cause title recording their deaths.
Learned counsel for the petitioner did not wish to bring on record the legal heirs of the deceased 8th, 11th and 14th appellants to pursue the Writ Appeal.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Dr Justice Anita Sumanth and Justice C.Kumarappan

Parties & counsel