✦ Madras High Court

Writ Petition No. 8264 of 2012 · Madras High Court

Writ Petition No. 8264 of 2012

Case at a glance

Outcome

Disposed of

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the abovedirections

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Sd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst. RegistrarlanTo:The CommissionerCorporation of ChennaiChennai-600 0031 CC to M/s.Devadasan, Advocate, SR.21801 1 CC to M/s.B.B.Sendhilkumar, Advocate, SR.21998Writ Petition No.8264 of 2012RSI(CO)SRA(03/04/2012)

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30.3.2012 CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.8264 of 2012 The Inter Mission IndustrialDevelopment AssociationA society registered under the Tamil NaduSocieties' Registration ActDoor No.2, 6th Cross Street, Collectorate Colony4th Street, Aminjikarai, Chennai-600 029... petitioner Vs.The CommissionerCorporation of ChennaiChennai-600 003... respondent Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pass orders in application dated 21.10.2009 claiming exemption from the payment of property tax under Section 103(c) of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919. For petitioner : Mr.Devadason and Sagar For respondents : Mr.B.B.SenthilkumarO R D E R Mr.B.B.Senthilkumar, the learned counsel, takes notice for the respondent.

2.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that it would suffice, if the respondent is directed to dispose of the application, dated 21.10.2009, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

3.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, has no objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

4.

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side, the respondent is directed to dispose of the application, dated 21.10.2009, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of acopy of this order. The petitioner is directed to furnish a copy of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the application, dated 21.10.2009, to the respondent, along with acopy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court, by this order, has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

Operative part

5.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Sd/Asst. Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst. RegistrarlanTo:The CommissionerCorporation of ChennaiChennai-600 0031 CC to M/s.Devadasan, Advocate, SR.21801 1 CC to M/s.B.B.Sendhilkumar, Advocate, SR.21998Writ Petition No.8264 of 2012RSI(CO)SRA(03/04/2012)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the abovedirections

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Registration Act, 1908; Constitution of India — art. 226; Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 — s. 103(c).

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Writ Petition No. 8264 of 2012). ← Search more judgments