Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

A. Santha Devi Vs. The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, represented by the Regional Manager

A. Santha Devi vs The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, represented by the Regional Manager

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jan 03, 2017
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1186203

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P(MD)No. 2707 of 2010 & M.P(MD) No. 1 of 2010
Subject
Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue
Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

A. Santha Devi

Respondent

The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, represented by the Regional Manager

Excerpt

(prayer: writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, praying this court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent dated 7.10.2009 issued in the reference mdro:tss:ret and quash the same and to direct the respondent to consider the application of the petitioner dated 23.6.2009 and appoint the petitioner as dealer for the retail outlet for the area mentioned in item no.129 of the advertisement published in hindu, dated 25.5.2009.) 1. when the matter was called on 16.12.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal''. even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2. in view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the respondent dated 7.10.2009 issued in the reference MDRO:TSS:RET and quash the same and to direct the respondent to consider the application of the Petitioner dated 23.6.2009 and appoint the Petitioner as dealer for the retail outlet for the area mentioned in Item No.129 of the Advertisement published in Hindu, dated 25.5.2009.)

1. When the matter was called on 16.12.2016, there was no representation on behalf of the Petitioner and hence, the matter was directed to be listed today under the caption 'for dismissal''. Even today also, there is no representation on behalf of the Petitioner.

2. In view of the same, the Writ Petition is dismissed for non-prosecution. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial