Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.AVODAIAMMAL versus MTC

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.Avodaiammal v. MTC - WA.No.408 of 2004 [2007] RD-TN 1120 (26 March 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS



Dated:- 26.03.2007

Coram:-

The Honble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM

and

The Honble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN

Writ Appeal No.408 of 2004

and

WAMP.No.712 of 2004

K.Avodaiammal @ Dhanam .. Appellant Vs.

Metropolitan Transport Corporation

(Chennai Ltd), rep. by its Managing Director,

Pallavan Illan, Anna Salai,

Chennai-600 002. .. Respondent Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 10.10.2003 made in W.P.No.16530 of 2003 passed by the learned single Judge. For Appellant : Mr.R.Anand Kumar For Respondent : Mr.V.R.Kamalanathan JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. SATHASIVAM, J.) The above writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 10.10.2003 passed in W.P.No.16530 of 2003, in and by which, the learned single Judge, following the earlier order dated 07.10.2003 passed in W.P.No.16618 and 16619 of 2003, has dismissed the writ petition.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Transport Corporation has brought to our notice that the petitioner/appellant, aggrieved by the action of the Transport Corporation in calling for tenders relating to grant of licence to run the tea shop at Vadapalani Bus Stand, has filed the writ petition before this Court.

3. It is seen from the proceedings of the Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, dated 30.05.2003 that the period of licence granted in favour of the petitioner to run the tea shop has already been expired. It further shows that the petitioner did not submit tender and she cannot run the tea shop after expiry of her period. The learned single Judge, based on the earlier order of this Court dated 07.10.2003, which relates to an identical issue, has dismissed her writ petition.

4. In view of the relief prayed for and of the fact that the lease period has already been expired and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner did not submit her tender, we do not find any valid ground for interference. In fact, inspite of affording opportunity on two occasions, the appellant/petitioner has not evinced any interest in prosecuting the writ appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, WAMP No.712 of 2004 is also dismissed.

raa To

The Managing Director,

Metropolitan Transport Corporation

(Chennai Ltd),

Pallavan Illan, Anna Salai,

Chennai-600 002.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.