Allowed

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl Ceebros Hotels Pvt. Limited

Madras HC13 Mar 2026CMP/30895/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The State sought condonation of an 820-day delay in filing a writ appeal against an order in a writ petition concerning the respondent hotel. The Division Bench found the reasons sufficient and held the matter should be decided on merits. The delay was condoned and the appeal was directed to be numbered.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 820 days condoned; Registry directed to number the writ appeal.

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs Tvl Ceebros Hotels Pvt. Limited — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

C.M.P.No.30895 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 13-03-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED

¶6

C.M.P.No.30895 of 2025

¶7

¶8

WA.SR.No.193007 of 2025

¶9

The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶10

Rep by the Secretary to Government, Prohibition and Excise Department, Fort St George, Chennai- 600 028.

¶11

The Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Government of Tamil Nadu, Ezhilagam, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai- 600 005.

¶12

… Appellants Vs.

¶13

TVL.Ceebros Hotels Pvt Limited, Rep by its Managing Director C.Subba Reddy, 19/1, Third Cross Street, R.A.Puram, Chennai- 600 028. ... Respondent

¶14

Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, to condone the delay of 820 days in filing the above Writ Appeal against the order dated 25.07.2023 made in W.P.No.9685 of 2021.

¶15

For Appellants: Mr.S.Ravichandran

¶16

Additional Government Pleader

¶17

For Respondent: Mr.A.Suresh

¶18

Page Nos.1/3

¶19

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

¶20

C.M.P.No.30895 of 2025

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by G.Jayachandran J.)

¶23

The reason for the delay of 820 days is explained in Paragraph 5 of the

¶24

affidavit. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner tries to distinguish the Division Bench judgment, against which the department has now preferred an appeal. We are of the firm view that the case has to be decided on merits and that can be done only after condonation of the delay.

¶25

Hence, the delay is condoned. The Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order

¶26

(G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.) & (SHAMIM AHMED, J.) 13-03-2026

¶27

Index :Yes/No. Neutral Citation :Yes/No. bsm

¶28

Page Nos.2/3

¶29

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

¶30

C.M.P.No.30895 of 2025

¶31

Dr. G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND SHAMIM AHMED, J. bsm

¶32

CMP No. 30895 of 2025 in WA SR NO. 193007 OF 2025

¶33

13-03-2026

¶34

Page Nos.3/3

¶35

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

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl Ceebros Hotels Pvt. Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Tamil Nadu v. Tvl Ceebros Hotels Pvt. Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Ravindran Vs the Income Tax Officer

The Commissioner of Vs M/S. Select Leather Finishers

The Commissioner of Vs M/S. Prince Prime Tanners

Bld Design Studio Vs Union of India

Cairn India Ltd. Vs the Assistant Director of Income Tax

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs Hotel Manhattan