Skip to content
Try for free
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.
See full guide →

C.Prabakar vs the Managing Director

C.Prabakar vs The Managing Director

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 12, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1431608

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
AI Brief & Ask Semantic Search Verdict Lens Devil's Bench DocMind
Start free trial See sample brief

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

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP/9701/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C.Prabakar

Respondent

The Managing Director

Excerpt

.....dated 04.03.2026 and fix a stipulated time to reopen the shop.for petitioner(s): mr.abdul saleem, sr. advocate for mr. a.thiyagarajan for respondent(s): mr. m.sekar, standing counsel for r1, r2 & r4 mr.yogesh kannadasan, spl.gp for r3orderthis writ petition is filed to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to reopen the retail liquor selling shops no.1511 situated at near new bus stand, avinashi, avinashi taluk, tiruppur district 641 605 so as to give full effect to grant of tender to petitioner in order dated 31.01.2026 in na.ka. nu. 001/a3/2026 by considering the petitioners representation dated 04.03.2026 and fix a stipulated time to reopen the shop. page2 of 62. the learned standing advocate for 1 st respondent would submit thatthe tasmac shop was closed only in view of certain differences between petitioner and landlord resultantly causing inconvenience/nuisance to public. he would however submit that if an affidavit of undertaking is submitted by petitioner and landlord that the shop would be run in a peaceful and lawful manner and the landlord undertakes to co-operate with the petitioner in running the shop in a lawful manner, the first respondent may have no objection to re- open the shop. agreed to by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner.3. learned senior counsel for the petitioner would submit that the licenseis only for a limited duration of six month and would request that the shops may be re-opened on filing affidavit of undertaking and also undertakes to file the affidavit of undertaking tomorrow. agreed to by learned standing advocate for 1st respondent.4. learned senior counsel for petitioner would also submit that since theduration of the license is only for a period of six months, however has remained closed for more than a month, he would seek liberty to file appropriate representation to exclude the period during which the shop remained closed. learned standing advocate for 1st respondent would submit that if any such.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ AND WMP NO. 10471 OF 2026 C.Prabakar No.6/214, Post Office Street, Avinashi, Tiruppur -641 654 ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Sate Marketing Corporation, (TASMAC) CMDA Complex, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

2. The Senior Regional Manager, (TASMAC), 305A, Vilankurichi Road, Peelamedu Railway Station Back side, Chintamani Co-operative Society Depot. Peelamedu, Coimbatore -641 004

3. The District Collector Collectorate Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

4. The District Manager, (TASMAC) Angeripalayam, Tiruppur-641 602

5. E.B. Shiva Prakash Door No.18-399 Sunnamubu Chollai, Page1 of 6 Avinashi, Tiruppur District 641 654

6. A. Karuppasamy S/o. Arumugam, Sriram Nagar, Avinashi Tiruppur District -641 654 ..Respondent(s)

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to reopen the Retail Liquor Selling Shops No.1511 situated at Near New Bus Stand, Avinashi, Avinashi Taluk, Tiruppur District 641 605 so as to give full effect to grant of tender to petitioner in order dated 31.01.2026 in Na.Ka. Nu. 001/A3/2026 by considering the petitioners representation dated 04.03.2026 and fix a stipulated time to reopen the Shop.

For Petitioner(s): MR.ABDUL SALEEM, SR. ADVOCATE FOR MR. A.Thiyagarajan For Respondent(s): MR. M.Sekar, Standing Counsel for R1, R2 & R4 MR.Yogesh Kannadasan, SPL.GP FOR R3

Order

This Writ Petition is filed to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to reopen the Retail Liquor Selling Shops No.1511 situated at Near New Bus Stand, Avinashi, Avinashi Taluk, Tiruppur District 641 605 so as to give full effect to grant of tender to petitioner in order dated 31.01.2026 in Na.Ka. Nu. 001/A3/2026 by considering the petitioners representation dated 04.03.2026 and fix a stipulated time to reopen the Shop. Page2 of 6

2. The learned Standing Advocate for 1 st respondent would submit that

the TASMAC shop was closed only in view of certain differences between petitioner and landlord resultantly causing inconvenience/nuisance to public. He would however submit that if an affidavit of undertaking is submitted by petitioner and landlord that the shop would be run in a peaceful and lawful manner and the landlord undertakes to co-operate with the petitioner in running the shop in a lawful manner, the first respondent may have no objection to re- open the shop. Agreed to by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the license

is only for a limited duration of six month and would request that the shops may be re-opened on filing affidavit of undertaking and also undertakes to file the affidavit of undertaking tomorrow. Agreed to by learned Standing Advocate for 1st respondent.

4. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner would also submit that since the

duration of the license is only for a period of six months, however has remained closed for more than a month, he would seek liberty to file appropriate representation to exclude the period during which the shop remained closed. Learned Standing Advocate for 1st respondent would submit that if any such representation is made the same would be considered in accordance with law. Page3 of 6

5. Recording the same, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 12-03-2026 Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No GSK/SPP Page4 of 6 To

1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Sate Marketing Corporation, (TASMAC) CMDA Complex, Egmore, Chennai-600 008

2. The Senior Regional Manager, (TASMAC), 305A, Vilankurichi Road, Peelamedu Railway Station Back side, Chintamani Co-operative Society Depot. Peelamedu, Coimbatore -641 004

3. The District Collector Collectorate Tiruppur District, Tiruppur.

4. The District Manager, (TASMAC) Angeripalayam, Tiruppur-641 602 Page5 of 6 MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J. GSK/SPP AND WMP NO. 10471 OF 2026 12-03-2026 Page6 of 6

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties C.Prabakar vs The Managing Director Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial
1M+ judgments indexed

Brief any judgment in 18 sections.

Search Supreme Court, High Courts, and tribunals - then open an AI Brief on any result. Core search is free; full AI desk free for 7 days.

Start 7-day free trial - no card Talk to Sales