Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 49597 (MAD)

The Managing Director v. T.James Manohar

CMP(MD)/6296/2026 · 2026-07-06

C V Karthikeyan, R Sakthivel

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CMP.(MD)Nos.6296 & 6297 of 2026 in WA.(MD)SR.Nos.39690 & 39691 of 2026 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. and R. SAKTHIVEL, J. These petitions have been filed seeking to condone the delay of 123 and 123 days, respectively in filing the Writ Appeals against the order dated 26.11.2025 made in W.P(MD)Nos.32094 & 32905 of 2025. 2.In the affidavit filed in support of the petitions explaining the reasons, it had been contended that the matter was placed before the Board to get an opinion and there was a delay in obtaining approval in filing appeals. 3.Notice had been directed and notice was served. The learned counsel entered appearance for the respondents. 4.Taking the above stated facts into consideration, the delay stands condoned and these petitions are allowed. Registry to number the appeals, if they 1/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis are otherwise in order. When the matters are listed for admission, the name of the learned counsel, who appeared for the respondents, be printed in the cause list. (C.V.K.,J) & (R.S.V.,J) 06.07.2026 ta 2/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J and R. SAKTHIVEL, J ta CMP.(MD)Nos.6296 & 6297 of 2026 in WA.(MD)SR.Nos.39690 & 39691 of 2026 06.07.2026 3/3 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis