Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 148587 (MAD)

C.Ponnuchamy v. C.Thangaraj

CMP(MD)/10634/2025 · 2025-07-10

G R Swaminathan, K Rajasekar

Transfer Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 in W.A.(MD)No.SR54718 of 2025 C.Ponnuchamy ... Petitioner Vs. 1.C.Thangaraj 2.The District Manager, Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), Madurai North, Madurai. 3.The Supervisor, Tamilnadu State Marketing Corporation Limited (TASMAC), TASMAC Shop.No.5311, Plot No.2, Maravankulam, Thirumangalam, Madurai. ... Respondents Prayer in C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 : Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code to permit the petitioner / 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 3rd party to challenge the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.13789 of 2025 dated 02.06.2025 by way of writ appeal. Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.SR54718 of 2025: Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.13789 of 2025 dated 02.06.2025 on the file of this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.B.Chandran ORDER (By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2.The petitioner seeks leave to challenge the order dated 02.06.2025 made in W.P.(MD)No.13789 of 2025. The said writ petition was filed by the petitioner's brother. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petition mentioned property belongs to the family and not exclusively to his brother / Thangaraj alone. But Thangaraj had let out the property in favour tasmac. Thangaraj / petitioner's brother filed 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 W.P.(MD)No.13789 of 2025 for vacating tasmac from the said premises. The learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by recording the undertaking given by tasmac earlier that they would vacate the premises within a period of eight weeks. The question of challenging the said order does not arise at all. We can understand that the petitioner herein is having some serious issues with his brother / Thangaraj. But then, these issues will have to be resolved in a civil suit. The question of maintaining writ appeal does not arise. Hence, this miscellaneous petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.A.(MD)No.SR54718 of 2025 is also dismissed at the SR stage. (G.R.S. J.,) & (K.R.S. J.,) 10.07.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and K.RAJASEKAR, J. ias C.M.P.(MD)No.10634 of 2025 in W.A.(MD)No.SR54718 of 2025 10.07.2025 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis