High Court

Scroll Down To Discover

Sort by:

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Directs Consideration of Representation for Removal of Encroachments on Public Pathway — Mandamus Issued Under Article 226. Statutory Authority Must Consider Representation on Merits; Non-Consideration Amounts to Dereliction of Duty....

The petitioner, Dravidaselvi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the District C...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Directs Consideration of Representation in Unauthorized Road on Agricultural Land Case — Mandamus Issued Without Expressing Views on Merits. Statutory Authority Must Consider Representation Within Three Months Under Article 226 of Constitution of India....

The petitioner, S. Mahalingam, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the responde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Directs Authorities to Consider Representation on Encroachment of Government Poromboke Lands — Duty of Statutory Authority to Consider Representation within Stipulated Time. Non-consideration of representation by statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India....

The petitioner, T. Muniyandi, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the District ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Suit, Upholding Concurrent Findings of Courts Below. The court held that the appellants, as defendants, failed to prove exclusive title or ouster of co-owners, and the plaintiffs established their half share in the suit properties....

The case involves a partition suit filed by the plaintiffs (respondents) against the defendants (appellants and others) seeking half share in 'A' and 'B' schedule properties. The common ancestor was K...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Suspension Order of KST Constable for Non-Compliance with KSRTC Regulations. Suspension order set aside as disciplinary authority failed to follow mandatory procedure under Regulation 10(1)(b) of KSRTC Employees' (Classification, Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1973....

The petitioner, Sri. Chandrashekhar S/o Shivappa Gosaladoddi, was appointed as a KST constable at Koppal Division on 13.05.2016. Due to shortage of staff at the respondent's division, he was assigned ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes No-Confidence Motion Notice Against Gram Panchayat President for Violation of Mandatory Procedure Under Section 49(2) of Karnataka Gram Swaraj and Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. Notice Issued Without Prior Resolution of No-Confidence Motion by Gram Panchayat is Illegal and Arbitrary....

The petitioner, Chethana A Channabasappa, the President of Hosahalli Gram Panchayat, challenged a notice dated 06.01.2025 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Respondent No.3) calling for a meeting t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Second Appeal in Specific Performance Suit — Upholds Trial Court's Decree for Specific Performance and Injunction. Sale Agreement with Full Payment and Possession Confers Equitable Right Under Section 53-A of Transfer of Property Act, 1882....

The plaintiff, Sarojini, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement dated June 25, 2003, and for permanent injunction against the defendant, Samidurai (since deceased, represented by hi...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Second Appeal in Property Dispute, Sets Aside First Appellate Court's Decree for Failure to Frame Substantial Question of Law Under Section 100 CPC. The Court held that the First Appellate Court's reversal of the Trial Court's decree was perverse and not based on evidence regarding adverse possession....

The case involves a property dispute between the plaintiffs (Manickammal and others) and the defendant (Arunachalam). The suit property originally belonged to Rathinam, husband of the first plaintiff,...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows Second Appeal in Property Dispute Due to Non-Compliance with Remand Order. First Appellate Court Failed to Appoint Commissioner to Measure Property as Per Sale Deeds, Vitiating Its Judgment....

The case involves a property dispute where the plaintiff originally filed a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and mandatory injunction. The Trial Court dismissed the suit, and the First Appe...