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.

Velraj and Another Vs. The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and Another

Velraj and Another vs The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jul 19, 2016
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1189744

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)Nos. 7097 & 7098 of 2015 & M.P(MD)Nos.1 & 1 of 2015
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

Velraj and Another

Respondent

The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department and Another

Excerpt

(prayer: in w.p(md)no.7097 of 2015: writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 20.4.2015 and to renew the leasehold interest of the petitioner for the land measuring an extent of 3 acres and 11 cents in survey no.158/4, mappillaiyoorani village, thoothukudi taluk, thoothukudi district belonging to arulmighu sankara rameswarar thirukkovil, thoothukudi.) prayer: in w.p(md)no.7098 of 2015: writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 20.4.2015 and to renew the leasehold interest of the petitioner for the land measuring an extent of 3 acres and 58 cents in survey no.159, mappillaiyoorani village, thoothukudi taluk, thoothukudi district belonging to arulmighu sankara rameswarar thirukkovil, thoothukudi.) common order 1. the learned counsel on record for the petitioner has circulated two letters, dated 27.06.2016 to the registry, seeking permission of this court to withdraw the writ petitions. the said letters are placed on record. 2. in view of the same, the writ petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are dismissed. no costs.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: IN W.P(MD)No.7097 of 2015: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 20.4.2015 and to renew the leasehold interest of the Petitioner for the land measuring an extent of 3 acres and 11 cents in Survey No.158/4, Mappillaiyoorani Village, Thoothukudi Taluk, Thoothukudi District belonging to Arulmighu Sankara Rameswarar Thirukkovil, Thoothukudi.)

Prayer: IN W.P(MD)No.7098 of 2015: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 20.4.2015 and to renew the leasehold interest of the Petitioner for the land measuring an extent of 3 acres and 58 cents in Survey No.159, Mappillaiyoorani Village, Thoothukudi Taluk, Thoothukudi District belonging to Arulmighu Sankara Rameswarar Thirukkovil, Thoothukudi.)

Common Order

1. The learned counsel on record for the petitioner has circulated two letters, dated 27.06.2016 to the Registry, seeking permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petitions. The said letters are placed on record.

2. In view of the same, the Writ Petitions are dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are dismissed. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial