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.

Uma Maheswari Vs. the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority

Uma Maheswari vs The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 28, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927367

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 High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Petition No.8439 of 2012
Subject
Constitution

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Constitution

Key legal issue
Constitution
Acts & sections
Constitution of India - Articles 226

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Uma Maheswari

Advocate Mr.V.M.Venkatramana, Adv.

Respondent

The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority

Advocate Mr.S.Navaneethan, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Constitution of India - Articles 226

Excerpt

this writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 24.4.2008 filed against the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide 193/2004 dated 27.12.2004 within the time frame fixed by this honourable court.order1. at this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that a communication, dated 26.5.2008, had been issued by the office of the first respondent, stating that the appeal filed by the petitioner had been admitted. however, no order had been passed, by the first respondent, in the said appeal, till date. therefore, the first respondent may be directed to dispose of the appeal, dated 24.4.2008, filed by the petitioner, challenging the order of the second respondent, dated 26.5.2004, within the time frame fixed by this court.2. the learned additional government pleader, appearing for the respondents, had submitted that, if the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending on the file of the first respondent, it shall be disposed of by the first respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within the time frame fixed by this court.3. in view of the above, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal, filed by the petitioner, dated 24.4.2008, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.the writ petition is disposed of accordingly. no costs.

Full Judgment

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the appeal dated 24.4.2008 filed against the order passed by the 2nd respondent vide 193/2004 dated 27.12.2004 within the time frame fixed by this Honourable Court.

ORDER

1. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that a communication, dated 26.5.2008, had been issued by the office of the first respondent, stating that the appeal filed by the petitioner had been admitted. However, no order had been passed, by the first respondent, in the said appeal, till date. Therefore, the first respondent may be directed to dispose of the appeal, dated 24.4.2008, filed by the petitioner, challenging the order of the second respondent, dated 26.5.2004, within the time frame fixed by this Court.

2. The learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents, had submitted that, if the appeal filed by the petitioner is pending on the file of the first respondent, it shall be disposed of by the first respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within the time frame fixed by this Court.

3. In view of the above, the first respondent is directed to dispose of the appeal, filed by the petitioner, dated 24.4.2008, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial