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.

V.Rathinam. Vs. the Chief Engineer and ors.

V.Rathinam. vs The Chief Engineer and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 25, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/927437

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.16045 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

V.Rathinam.

Advocate Mr.Martin Jeya Kumar, Adv

Respondent

The Chief Engineer and ors.

Advocate Mr.P.Gunaraj, Adv

Legal References

Acts
Constitution of India - Articles 226

Excerpt

writ petition is filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue  a writ of   mandamus, directing the respondents to effect electricity deposit refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's package company and the wedding hall situate at no.22, aanjeeamman koil street, anakaputhur, chennai and padmapriya kalyana mandapam, vinoonha nagar, anakaputhur, chennai for related relief.order1. this writ petition is filed  praying to issue  a  writ of   mandamus, directing the respondents to effect electricity deposit refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's package company and the wedding hall situate at no.22, aanjeeamman koil street, anakaputhur, chennai and padmapriya kalyana mandapam, vinoonha nagar, anakaputhur, chennai for related relief. 2.  mr.p.gunaraj,  learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the  respondents.   by consent the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 3. petitioner made a representation  dated 28.5.2009 to the   respondents requesting electricity deposit refund.  in view of the prayer sought for in this writ petition,  without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, if the representation dated 28.5.2009 is not disposed of already, the second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.4.  the writ petition is disposed of as above.  no costs.  

Full Judgment

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue  a Writ of   Mandamus, directing the respondents to effect Electricity Deposit Refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's Package Company and the Wedding Hall situate at No.22, Aanjeeamman Koil Street, Anakaputhur, Chennai and Padmapriya Kalyana Mandapam, Vinoonha Nagar, Anakaputhur, Chennai for related relief.

ORDER

1. This Writ Petition is filed  praying to issue  a  Writ of   Mandamus, directing the respondents to effect Electricity Deposit Refund on the representation dated 28.5.2009 of the patentor's Package Company and the Wedding Hall situate at No.22, Aanjeeamman Koil Street, Anakaputhur, Chennai and Padmapriya Kalyana Mandapam, Vinoonha Nagar, Anakaputhur, Chennai for related relief.

 2.  Mr.P.Gunaraj,  learned counsel takes notice on behalf of the  respondents.   By consent the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

 3. Petitioner made a representation  dated 28.5.2009 to the   respondents requesting electricity deposit refund.  In view of the prayer sought for in this writ petition,  without going into the merits of the petitioner's claim, if the representation dated 28.5.2009 is not disposed of already, the second respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4.  The writ petition is disposed of as above.  No costs.  

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial