Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHENGOTTAI 7 STAR RECREATION CLUB versus THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Shengottai 7 Star recreation club v. The Deputy Superintendent of police - WRIT PETITION No.3220 of 2007 [2007] RD-TN 1509 (18 April 2007)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 18/04/2007

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN

WRIT PETITION No.3220 of 2007

Shengottai 7 Star recreation club,

rep.by its Secretary R.Gopal,

No.436, K.C.Road,

Shengottai,

Tirunelveli District ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Deputy Superintendent of police,

Tenkasi Region,

Tirunelveli District.

2. The Inspector of Police,

Shengottai Police Station,

Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

The Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the respondents in any way interfering with the functioning of the petitioner club in accordance with the memorandum of the petitioner club.

For petitioner : Mr.K.Ananth

For respondents : Mr.D.Sasikumar

Government Advocate

:O R D E R



Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the respondents.

2. It is submitted that the petitioner's club had been started on 05.01.2007 and registered on 08.03.2007, under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act. It is further submitted that the club has been started for the purpose of indoor games like Chess, Carom etc., and outdoor games like Weight-lifting, Volley-ball, Kabadi and Silambam etc., and it has been established only for the purpose of entertainment and to enrich the skills of the members of the club. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that no illegal activities are being carried on in the petitioner club. However, it is alleged that the respondents are interfering with the functioning of the petitioner club.

3.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that there is no interference from the respondents, as stated by the petitioner. It is submitted that the writ petition has been filed only on a mere apprehension.

4.Based on the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, the writ petition is closed, making it clear that it is open to the petitioner to move this Court if any undue interference is caused by the respondents in the activities of the club.

With the above observations, the above writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

To

1. The Deputy Superintendent of police,

Tenkasi Region,

Tirunelveli District.

2. The Inspector of Police,

Shengottai Police Station,

Tirunelveli District. 


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.