Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Petitioner vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Nov 25, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1186847

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1186847
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: The Honourable Mr. Jusatice D. Krishnakumar
Decided On: Nov 25, 2016
Case Number: C.M.P(MD)No. 11341 of 2016 in C.R.P(PD)(MD)No. 2081 of 2016
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

Petitioner

Respondent

Excerpt

1. the present application is filed to extend the time to comply with the conditional order made in c.m.p.no.9716 of 2016 in c.r.p(md)no.2081 of 2016, dated 7.10.2016, by this court, within one month from from the date of order.. 2. during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the respondents would strongly objected for the extension of time, since within the time granted by this court, the revision petitioner has not complied with the order. therefore this court cannot consider the present application. 3. during the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner came forward and submit that the conditional order as directed by this court on 7.10.2016 shall be complied within the period of two weeks from today. thereafter, the petitioner shall pay the balance amount within a reasonable time as fixed by this court. 4. in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents cannot have any serious objection in accepting the same, if the said order is complied with by the revision petitioner, in letter and spirit. 5. by accepting the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, further period of two weeks time is granted comply with the conditional order, dated 7.10.2016. if the conditional order is not complied with within the said period, further extension of time will not be given. 6. the learned counsel for the revision petitioner has also undertakes to file an undertaking affidavit that he will undertake to pay the balance amount within a reasonable time before this court on 28.11.206. 7. in view of the above, post the matter on 28.11.2016, for filing undertaking affidavit by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.

Full Judgment

1. The present application is filed to extend the time to comply with the conditional order made in C.M.P.No.9716 of 2016 in C.R.P(MD)No.2081 of 2016, dated 7.10.2016, by this Court, within one month from from the date of order..

2. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the respondents would strongly objected for the extension of time, since within the time granted by this Court, the revision petitioner has not complied with the order. Therefore this Court cannot consider the present application.

3. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner came forward and submit that the conditional order as directed by this Court on 7.10.2016 shall be complied within the period of two weeks from today. Thereafter, the Petitioner shall pay the balance amount within a reasonable time as fixed by this Court.

4. In view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the Petitioner, the learned counsel for the respondents cannot have any serious objection in accepting the same, if the said order is complied with by the revision petitioner, in letter and spirit.

5. By accepting the submission of the learned counsel for the Petitioner, further period of two weeks time is granted comply with the conditional order, dated 7.10.2016. If the conditional order is not complied with within the said period, further extension of time will not be given.

6. The learned counsel for the revision petitioner has also undertakes to file an undertaking affidavit that he will undertake to pay the balance amount within a reasonable time before this Court on 28.11.206.

7. In view of the above, Post the matter on 28.11.2016, for filing undertaking affidavit by the learned counsel for the revision petitioner.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Petitioner vs Respondent Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge The Honourable Mr. Jusatice D. Krishnakumar