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 →

Sathish Kumar vs R.Ramakrishnan

Sathish Kumar vs R.Ramakrishnan

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided May 22, 2025
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1892432

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WMP/15771/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sathish Kumar

Respondent

R.Ramakrishnan

Excerpt

w.m.p. no.15771 of 2025 in w.p.no.39146 of 2025 w.m.p. no.15771 of 2025 in w.p.no.39146 of 2024 d.bharatha chakravarthy. j.,considering the nature of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this miscellaneous petition, as well as those in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, and taking into account the complaint made by the petitioner/proposed respondent, it is evident that the petitioner/proposed respondent is a proper party to the writ petition. the petitioner/proposedrespondent has also brought to light certain factsthrough his affidavit and has filed relevant documents. therefore, the miscellaneous petition seeking to implead the petitioner/proposed respondent as the 5th respondent is allowed.2. the registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title accordingly. .05.2025 jer page no.1 of 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Full Judgment

W.M.P. No.15771 of 2025 in W.P.No.39146 of 2025 W.M.P. No.15771 of 2025 in W.P.No.39146 of 2024 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY. J.,

Considering the nature of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of this miscellaneous petition, as well as those in the counter affidavit filed by the 1st respondent, and taking into account the complaint made by the petitioner/proposed respondent, it is evident that the petitioner/proposed respondent is a proper party to the Writ Petition. The petitioner/proposed

respondent has also brought to light certain facts

through his affidavit and has filed relevant documents. Therefore, the miscellaneous petition seeking to implead the petitioner/proposed respondent as the 5th respondent is allowed.

2. The Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title accordingly. .05.2025 Jer Page No.1 of 1 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Continue Your Research

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2025 Same Parties Sathish Kumar vs R.Ramakrishnan Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

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