← Library
Madras High CourtWP/30818/2022dismissed as infructuous

K.P.Radha v. The Revenue Divisional Officer(Central Chennai),

2022-11-18Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 18.11.2022 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR K.P.Radha

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Revenue Divisional Officer (Central Chennai), 5-73, SH 112, Gandhi Nagar, Anna Nagar West Extension, Chennai - 600 040.

2.Anilkumar A.M.

...Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose the petition for cancellation of Settlement Deed under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 dated 27.07.2022 vide Na.Ka.No.3836/2002/A4 dated 10.08.2022 on the file of the 1st respondent on merits.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.T.Jayaraman For R1 : Mr.T.K.Saravanan, Government Advocate 1/4

ORDER

The prayer sought for is for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose the petition for cancellation of Settlement Deed under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 dated 27.07.2022 vide Na.Ka.No.3836/2002/A4 dated 10.08.2022 on the file of the 1st respondent.

2. The petitioner, being a senior citizen, has filed an application under Section 23(1) of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, on 27.07.2022. Pursuant to the said application, a summon was issued by the first respondent on 10.08.2022 to both the petitioner as well as the second respondent, against whom the complaint was made to cancel the Settlement Deed.

3. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, no orders have been passed by the first respondent and still the application has been kept pending. Therefore, in order to direct the first respondent to dispose of the said application, the petitioner has moved the present writ petition. 2/4

4. Heard Mr.A.T.Jayaraman, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.T.K.Saravanan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent.

5. The learned Government Advocate, on instructions, would submit that, subsequently, the application submitted by the petitioner, having been considered on merits, was disposed of by the first respondent by order dated 30.09.2022 and that order has also been communicated to the petitioner.

6. Recording the said submission made by the learned Government Advocate for the first respondent as the prayer sought for by the petitioner has been accomplished, this Court feels that no further order needs to be passed in the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No costs. 18.11.2022 Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk 3/4

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

hvk To The Revenue Divisional Officer (Central Chennai), 5-73, SH 112, Gandhi Nagar, Anna Nagar West Extension, Chennai - 600 040.

18.11.2022 4/4