The Manager Vs N.Chithrakala

The Manager vs N.Chithrakala

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Feb 02, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1648431

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/1648431
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Dr Justice G. Jayachandran,Honourable Mr Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan
Decided On: Feb 02, 2026
Case Number: CMP(MD)/11272/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

The Manager

Respondent

N.Chithrakala

Excerpt

.....2.the executive engineer and administrative officer thiruchirappalli housing unit kajamalai road thiruchirappalli ... petitioners -vs- n.chithrakala ... respondent prayer: petition filed under section 5 of limitation act to condone the delay of 40 days in filing the above writ appeal as against the order dated 05.02.2025, passed in w.p.(md) no.4071 of 2022. for petitioners : mr.a.kannan for respondent : ms.sheena palaniveluorder[order of the court was made by dr.g.jayachandran, j.] this civil miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 40 days in the filing the above writ appeal.2. learned counsel appearing for the respondent / writ petitioneropposes the condonation of delay stating that the order of the learned single judge has already been complied with by the petitioners herein pursuant to the contempt petition filed by the writ petitioner and therefore, nothing survives for consideration in this writ appeal.3. however, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners wouldsubmit that due to the intervening summer vacation, there was a delay in filing the above writ appeal and the learned single judge had not taken into consideration the grounds raised by the petitioners herein in their counter affidavit filed in the writ petition. hence, the order of the learned single judge is to be revisited.4. this court is satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit. hence, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed and the delay of 40 days in filing the above writ appeal is condoned.5. registry is directed to number the writ appeal, if the papers are otherwise in order, and post the same for admission in the usual course. [g.j., j.] [k.k.r.k., j.] ncc : yes / no index : yes / no internet : yes / no krkdr.g.jayachandran, j.andk.k.ramakrishnan, j.krk in

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.02.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN in 1.The Manager Tamilnadu Housing Board CMDA Complex E&C Market Road Koyambedu, Chennai 2.The Executive Engineer and Administrative Officer Thiruchirappalli Housing Unit Kajamalai Road Thiruchirappalli ... Petitioners -vs- N.Chithrakala ... Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act to condone the delay of 40 days in filing the above writ appeal as against the order dated 05.02.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.4071 of 2022. For Petitioners : Mr.A.Kannan For Respondent : Ms.Sheena Palanivelu

ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.] This civil miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 40 days in the filing the above writ appeal.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent / writ petitioner

opposes the condonation of delay stating that the order of the learned Single Judge has already been complied with by the petitioners herein pursuant to the contempt petition filed by the writ petitioner and therefore, nothing survives for consideration in this writ appeal.

3. However, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would

submit that due to the intervening summer vacation, there was a delay in filing the above writ appeal and the learned Single Judge had not taken into consideration the grounds raised by the petitioners herein in their counter affidavit filed in the writ petition. Hence, the order of the learned Single Judge is to be revisited.

4. This Court is satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit. Hence, this civil miscellaneous petition is allowed and the delay of 40 days in filing the above writ appeal is condoned.

5. Registry is directed to number the writ appeal, if the papers are otherwise in order, and post the same for admission in the usual course. [G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.] NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No krk

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

AND

K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

krk in

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties The Manager vs N.Chithrakala Same Judge Honourable Dr Justice G. Jayachandran,Honourable Mr Justice K...