Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

K.THANGARAJ versus R.HARIHARAN

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


K.Thangaraj v. R.Hariharan - OSA. No.95 of 2005 [2007] RD-TN 1340 (9 April 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS



Dated:- 09.04.2007

Coram:-

The Honble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM

and

The Honble Mr. Justice S.TAMILVANAN

Rev.A.No.133 of 2006 in OSA No.95 of 2005,

O.S.A.Nos.95 to 97 of 2005, M.P.No.1/2007 & CMP.7917/2005 O.S.A.No.95 OF 2005 & Rev.A.No.133 of 2006 :

K.Thangaraj ... Appellant/Review petitioner -vs-

1.R.Hariharan

2.G.Balakrishnan

3.All India Sai Samaj,

rep.by its President

4.S.Karunakaran

5.Sai Vidyalaya Educational Trust,

rep.by its Managing Trustee

S.Karunakaran

6.K.H.Suban Singh

7.S.Natarajan

8.K.Purushothaman

9.K.Ezhilraj

10.K.Jayachandran ... Respondents in both O.S.A.Nos.96 & 97 OF 2005 :

K.Thangaraj ... Appellant in both appeals -vs-

1.All India Sai Samaj,

rep.by its President.

2.R.Hariharan

3.G.Balakrishnan

4.M.Vasudevan

5.T.R.Kulasekaran

6.S.Karunakaran

7.Sai Vidyalaya Educational Trust,

rep.by its Managing Trustee

S.Karunakaran

8.Veeraraghavan

9.S.Subramaniam

10.T.R.Rajagopalan ... Respondents in both appeals

Review application and Original Side Appeals under Order XXXVI Rule 11 of O.S.Rules, read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment in OSA No.95/2005 dated 21.08.2006 and Application Nos.2603/2003, 509/1005 & 511/2005 in C.S.No.44/2001 dated 19.03.2005 respectively. For appellant in all : Mr.T.L.Ram Mohan, O.S.As & Rev.Appln. Senior Counsel, for Mr.J.Balagopal.

For respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.M.Balasubramanian. in O.S.A.No.95/2005 &

Rev.A.133/2006 &

respondents 2 & 3 in O.S.A.Nos.96 & 97/2005

For R3 in O.S.A.95/2005 : Mr.R.P.Kabilan & Rev.A.133/2006 & R1

in O.S.A.Nos.96 & 97/2005 For R4 & 5 in O.S.A.95/2005

& Rev.A.133/2006 &R6 & 7 : Mr.V.Raghavachari in O.S.As.96 & 97/2005

J U D G M E N T



(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.SATHASIVAM,J.)

Heard Mr.T.L.Ram Mohan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant/review petitioner as well as learned counsel appearing for all the respondents.

2. All the learned counsel fairly state that as on date, nothing survives for adjudication in these appeals. They have also expressed that the parties may be permitted to move the learned single Judge before whom the civil suit is pending for further direction/relief, if need arises.

3. In view of the above statement, Original Side Appeal Nos.95 to 97 of 2005 and Review Application No.133 of 2006 in OSA No.95/2005 are dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Parties are free to move the learned single Judge, who is having jurisdiction over the civil suit for appropriate relief/direction, if need arises. Consequently, M.P.No.1/2007 and CMP.7917/2005 are also dismissed. raa


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.