Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
Rice Mill Owners and Paddy and Rice Whole Sale Merchants Sangam – Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.A. Nos. 1186, 1191, 1196, 1197, 1202, 1203 of 2021, C.M.P. Nos. 7569, 7596, 7614, 7623, 7644, 7647 of 2021
Decided On : 10-07-2024
AMENDMENT - TAMIL NADU AGRICULTURAL PRODUCE MARKETING ACT - The court addressed the implications of the Amendment Act 15 of 2019 on the existing legal framework, concluding that the amendment rendered the grounds for adjudication moot, leading to the closure of all writ appeals without further examination of merits.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants filed writ appeals challenging the order dated 22.08.2019 in W.P. No. 19596 of 2018, citing issues arising from the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1987.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the amendment to the Act eliminated the basis for the disputes raised in the appeals, thus no further adjudication was necessary.
Issues: Whether the amendment to the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1987 affected the merits of the case and warranted further adjudication.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the amendment rendered the existing disputes moot, negating the need for a detailed examination of the merits of the case.
Result: All writ appeals were closed without costs, and connected miscellaneous petitions were also closed.
JUDGMENT :
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 22.08.2019 passed in W.P. No. 19596 of 2018.
1. Mr. G. Sankaran, the learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants in all the writ appeals would submit that the cause did not exist on account of amendment of Act 15 of 2019, issued amending the Tamil Nadu Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1987.
2. In view of the Amendment Act, no further adjudication of merits needs to be undertaken in respect of the grounds raised between the parties. Consequently, all the Writ Appeals stand closed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Active participation in legal proceedings is essential, and failure to appear can lead to dismissal of appeals.
All petitioners must be included in a writ appeal challenging a common order to ensure maintainability.
A legal cause lapses upon the death of a party, resulting in the closure of related proceedings.
A Writ Appeal can be dismissed if the appellant indicates through counsel that it is not being pursued.
A recorded compromise between disputing parties can effectively resolve the matter, eliminating the need for further judicial intervention.
A writ appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the appellants fail to appear and show interest in pursuing the case.
Writ appeals can be dismissed as infructuous when the underlying cause of action has ceased to exist.
A writ appeal can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the appellant fails to appear and show interest in pursuing the case.
A legal action becomes infructuous when the underlying cause for the action ceases to exist, warranting dismissal of the appeal.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
