SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Mad) 1695

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
R.SURESH KUMAR, G.ARUL MURUGAN, JJ.
Bodinaykkanur Nadar Uravinmurai Society (Reg. No.115/2013) – Appellant
Versus
P.N.Vairamani – Respondent
W.A.(MD)No.1056 of 2024 and C.M.P.(MD)No.7892 of 2024
Decided on : 21-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellant : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew
For the Respondent: Mr.Prem Ayyathurai for M/s.Ajmal Associates

IMPORTANT POINT
The dismissal of the appeal was based on the principle that once a request has been considered and resolved by the appropriate authority, further judicial intervention may be unnecessary.

Headnote:

Writ Appeal - Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act - The court dismissed the writ appeal as the District Registrar had already considered and rejected the writ petitioner's request for an observer at the society's meeting, rendering further adjudication unnecessary.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was the second respondent in a writ petition where the first respondent sought a Writ of Mandamus to direct the District Registrar to appoint an observer for an extraordinary general meeting of a society.

Finding of the Court:

The court noted that the District Registrar had considered the writ petitioner's request and issued a rejection, which was presented to the court, indicating that the matter had been resolved.

Issues: Whether the appeal should be upheld given that the District Registrar had already acted on the writ petitioner's request.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that since the District Registrar had already addressed the writ petitioner's request, there was no further need for adjudication in the appeal.

Result: The Writ Appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

JUDGMENT :

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.]

PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 11.06.2024 in W.P.(MD) No.12209 of 2024 and dismiss the writ petition.

This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.12209 of 2024 dated 11.06.2024.

2. The present appellant was the second respondent in a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.12209 of 2024, where the first respondent stood as a writ petitioner, who filed the said writ petition seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent therein who is the second respondent herein ie., the District Registrar (Societies) of Theni District, to nominate and depute an observer under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, to be present and to oversee the proceedings of the extraordinary general meeting of the Bodinayakkanur Nadar Uravinmurai Society (Reg. No.115/2013) to be conducted on 23.06.2024.

3. Learned Writ Court having considered the said prayer submitted by the writ petitioner had directed the District Registrar to consider the representation given by the writ petitioner and pass orders within seven [7] days. With this direction, the order was passed by the learned Judge on 11.06.2024, in the said writ petition which is impugned herein.

4. However, today when the case is taken up for admission as an urgently mentioned case, it is brought to our notice by the learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent that pursuant to the order passed by the Writ Court, the representation of the writ petitioner/first respondent having been considered was rejected by the proceedings issued by the District Registrar dated 19.06.2024 and he has produced the said communication also before this Court by way of a typed set of documents.

5. Having regard to the said factor that the request of the writ petitioner/first respondent itself having been considered and rejected, the present appellant may not have any grievance even against the order that was passed by the writ court in the writ petition. This position is not controverted by the learned counsel for the appellant.

6. Therefore, recording the aforesaid development, as no more adjudication is required in this appeal, the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top