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) 1776

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, C.Kumarappan, JJ.
Mr.Ayyalusamy - Petitioner
Versus
The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and ors. – Respondents
WP.No.18600 of 2021
Decided On : 11-06-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Respondent: Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar, Standing Counsel, Mr.S.R.Raghunathan

IMPORTANT POINT
A writ petition can be dismissed for non-prosecution if the petitioner fails to appear in court, demonstrating a lack of interest in the proceedings.

Headnote:

DISMISSAL - WRIT PETITION - The court dismissed the writ petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear on multiple occasions, indicating a lack of interest in pursuing the case. The court emphasized the importance of the petitioner's presence in legal proceedings and the consequences of failing to engage with the court process.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a Mandamus to direct the respondents to act on a representation made against the third respondent and to dispose of the complaint within a specified timeframe.

Finding of the Court:

The court noted that the petitioner did not appear for the hearing on two scheduled dates, which led to the conclusion that the petitioner was not interested in pursuing the case.

Issues: Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear in court.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the absence of the petitioner on multiple occasions justified the dismissal of the writ petition, reinforcing the principle that parties must actively engage in the legal process.

Result: The writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution, with no costs awarded.

ORDER :

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 to take action on the representation made by the petitioner against the third respondent and to dispose the complaint on merits with a specified time frame as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court and pass such further or other orders as may be deemed fit and necessary in the circumstances of the case.

When the matter was listed for hearing on 04.06.2024, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. In order to give opportunity to the petitioner, this Court passed an order, directing the Registry to list this matter under the caption “For Dismissal” on 11.06.2024.

2. Even today i.e., on 11.06.2024, when the matter is taken up for hearing, none appeared for the petitioner. Thus, it is evident that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing the matter. Accordingly, the Writ Petition in W.P.No.18600 of 2021 stands dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.

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