Allowed

The District Collector v. Veeran

Madras HC2 Feb 2026CMP(MD)/19769/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench allowed this civil miscellaneous petition to condone the 212-day delay in filing a writ appeal. The court granted permission due to subsequent developments unknown to the Single Judge who originally allowed the petitioner's writ.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 212 days in filing the writ appeal is condoned; the appeal is to be numbered and posted for admission.

The District Collector Vs Veeran — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.02.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶6

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025 in W.A.(MD) SR No.105046 of 2025

¶7

1.The District Collector Sivagangai District Sivagangai

¶8

2.The District Revenue Officer O/o.District Revenue Office Sivagangai

¶9

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer O/o.Revenue Divisional Office Sivagangai

¶10

4.The Tahsildar

¶11

Taluk Office Ilayankudi

... Petitioners

-vs-

Veeran

... Respondent

_____________ Page 1 of 4_

¶17

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

¶18

PRAYER:

¶19

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025

¶20

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 212 days in filing the above writ appeal as against the order dated

¶21

04.04.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.12210 of 2024.

¶22

For Petitioners : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader

¶23

For Respondent : Mr.J.John

¶24

O R D E R [Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.]

¶25

This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 212 days in the filing the above writ appeal.

¶26

2. Heard the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶27

3. In view of the subsequent development took place in the facts of the case, which was not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge while allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent / writ petitioner, we are inclined to condone the delay.

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

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

¶30

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025

¶31

4. Accordingly, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed and the

¶32

delay of 212 days in filing the above writ appeal is condoned.

¶33

5. Registry is directed to number the writ appeal, if the papers are

¶34

otherwise in order, and post the same for admission in the usual course.

¶35

[G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.] 02.02.2026

¶36

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶37

krk

¶38

To:

¶39

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶40

2.The District Revenue Officer, O/o.District Revenue Office, Sivagangai.

¶41

3.The Revenue Divisional Officer, O/o.Revenue Divisional Office, Sivagangai.

¶42

4.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Ilayankudi.

¶43

Page 3 of 4

¶44

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

¶45

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025

¶46

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J. AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶47

krk

¶48

C.M.P.(MD) No.19769 of 2025 in W.A.(MD) SR No.105046 of 2025

¶49

02.02.2026

¶50

_____________ Page 4 of 4_

¶51

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

The District Collector v. Veeran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The District Collector v. Veeran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs T. Nagarathinam

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs N.Ravichandran

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs v. Sahayarani Valdari

The State of Tamil Nadu Vs L Parthasarathy

The Principal Secretary to Government Vs M. Balamurugan

The Director of School Education Vs a v Higher Secondary School