Vasantha v. E. Punitha

C.M.P. No.6675 of 2023 in W.A. SR. No.11940 of 2023 S. VAIDYANATHAN, J.

and K. RAJASEKAR, J.

This is a petition to condone the delay of 332 days in filing the writ appeal.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have not engaged an advocate and they have made allegation in paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed in support of this petition. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit dated 18.07.2023 stating that there was collusion.

The learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that the petitioners in this petition are aware of the pendency of the writ petition.

For the purpose of deciding this delay condonation petition, the allegation against the respondents need not be gone into and the same can be considered at the time of taking up the appeal on merits. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

S. VAIDYANATHAN, J.

and K. RAJASEKAR, J.

cad Hence, satisfied with the reasons stated by the petitioners, the aforesaid delay is condoned, giving liberty to all the parties to raise their objections, including the aspect that the petitioners herein had no knowledge about the pendency of the writ petition, when the writ appeal is taken up for hearing.

The Registry shall number the writ appeal, if it is otherwise in order. (S.V.N., J.) (K.R.S., J.) 18.12.2023 cad C.M.P. No.6675 of 2023 in W.A. SR. No.11940 of 2023 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis