Dismissed¶20

The Managing Director v. the Presiding Officer

Madras HC29 Jul 2026REV.APLC(MD)/1/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

condonation of delay; review petition; Order 47 Rule 1 CPC; Section 114 CPC; non-reviewability of discretionary orders; remedy is appeal not review; Managing Director TNSTC (Madurai Division); Presiding Officer Labour Court Madurai; K.Ramasamy; WA(MD)SR.No.29373 of 2020; CMP(MD)No.4293 of 2020; 421 days delay in filing writ appeal; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court; C.V.Karthikeyan J.; R.Sakthivel J.; decided 29.07.2026; review dismissed, no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

What did the court decide?

Examination of an application seeking condonation of delay is an exercise of discretion; such discretion can never be reviewed. ¶19

The Managing Director Vs the Presiding Officer — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

REV.APLC(MD)No.1 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 29.07.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

¶6

REV.APLC(MD)No.1 of 2022 and CMP(MD)No.36 of 2022

¶7

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai Division) Ltd, Bye Pass Road, Madurai-16. ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Madurai.

¶10

K.Ramasamy ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER:- Review Petition filed under under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code, to review the order dated 09.09.2020 made in CMP(MD)No.4293 of 2020 in WA(MD)SR.No. 29373 of 2020.

¶12

For Petitioners : Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah

¶13

1/3

¶14

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

¶15

REV.APLC(MD)No.1 of 2022

¶16

ORDER

¶17

(Order of the Court was delivered by C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.)

¶18

The review application has been filed questioning the order made in CMP(MD)No.4293 of 2020 in WA(MD)SR.No.29373 of 2020, wherein, by order dated 09.09.2020, the said Civil Miscellaneous Petition which had been filed seeking to condone the delay of 421 days

¶19

in filing the writ appeal, had been dismissed. Examination of an application seeking condonation of delay is the discretion. Discretion could be exercised either by condoning the delay or refusing to condone the delay. Such discretion can never be reviewed. But however, the order passed could be appealed against.

¶20