Madras High CourtWMP/21079/2018disposed of

R.Jayaprakash, v. P.Pon Perumal S/O.Ponnusamy

2018-08-03Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Friday, the Third day of August Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM WMP No.21079 of 2018 IN WP.9745 of 2018 R.JAYAPRAKASH, [ PETITIONER ] Vs 1 P.PON PERUMAL, S/O.PONNUSAMY [ RESPONDENTS ] 129, SUNDARA VINAYAGAR KOIL STREET, KILKODUNGALORE VILLAGE, VANDAVASI TALUK, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

2 THE TAMILNADU ARASU CABLE TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 34/123 VI FLOOR, DUGAR TOWER MARSHALLS ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI-08.

3 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR TAMIL NADU ARASU CABLE TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein and in the affidavit filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to Vacate the Interim Order granted on 04.06.2018 in WMP No. 11672 / 2018 in WP No.9745 / 2018.

Order : This petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.B.JAWAHAR, Advocate for the petitioner and of M/S.DAKSHAYANI REDDY, Advocate on behalf of the 1st Respondent, M/S.S.GUNASEKARAN, Advocate, for 2nd Respondent and M/S.A.SRIJAYANTHI, Special Government Pleader for 3rd Respondent and the court made the following order:- The learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent made a submission that the Writ Petitioner by virtue of an interim order interfering with the area of operation of the 3rd respondent and distrubing the business activities of the 3rd respondent. In otherwords, it is stated that the Writ Petitioner is taking undue advantage of the interim order granted by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Writ Petitioner will not take any undue advantage or otherwise and he will continuing his operation only within the Jurisdiction allowed to him and as per the conditions stipulated in the license.

3. The respondents 1 and 2 are directed to monitor the activities of the Writ Petitioner as well as the 3rd respondent and ensure that the Writ Petitioner and the 3rd respondent continue their operation of Cable TV, in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in the license.

4. Interim stay already granted by this court on 04/06/2018 is modified in such terms. This Petition stands disposed of. -sd/- 03/08/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. ) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE TAMILNADU ARASU CABLE TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR 34/123 VI FLOOR, DUGAR TOWER MARSHALLS ROAD, EGMORE, CHENNAI-08.

2 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR TAMIL NADU ARASU CABLE TELEVISION CORPORATION LTD, THIRUVANNAMALAI DISTRICT.

C.C. to M/S.B.JAWAHAR Advocate SR.NO.9312.

C.C. to M/S M/S.DAKSHAYANI REDDY, Advocate, SR.NO.9292. The Government Advocate, High Court, Madras - 104. Order in WMP.21079/2018 in WP.9745/2018 Date :03/08/2018 From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Interim Orders in this format SA(09.08.2018) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/