Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Virendra Mehta vs The State Of Tamilnadu ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 13945 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 13945 Mad
Judgement Date : 13 July, 2021

Madras High Court
Virendra Mehta vs The State Of Tamilnadu ... on 13 July, 2021
                                                                                W.A.No.2084 of 2013
                                                                                and M.P.No.1 of 2013

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED : 13.07.2021

                                                      CORAM

                                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
                                                    and
                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM

                                               W.A.No.2084 of 2013
                                                      and
                                                M.P.No. 1 of 2013

                     Virendra Mehta                             ... Appellant
                                                         -vs-

                     1.The State of Tamilnadu represented
                       by the Secretary to the government,
                       Public (SC) Dept., Fort St. George,
                       Chennai-6 00 009.

                     2.The Union of India represented by
                       The Secretary to the Government,
                       Ministry of Finance, Dept. of revenue,
                       (COFEPOSA-UNIT), New Delhi.

                     3.The Sub Inspector of Police,
                       Office of the Commissioner of police,
                       Egmore, Chennai-8

                     4.The Deputy Director,
                       Enforcement directorate, No.6, Haddows road,
                       Shasthri Bhavan, Nungambakkam,
                       Chennai-34.

                                                                        ... Respondents

                     1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                     W.A.No.2084 of 2013
                                                                                     and M.P.No.1 of 2013



                     Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the

                     order dated 27.08.2013 made in W.P.No.7543 of 2013 by a learned Single

                     Judge of this Court.

                                           For Appellant        : No appearance

                                           For R1 to R3          : Mr.T.Arunkumar

                                                                   (Government Advocate)

                                            For R2               : No appearance

                                           For R4                : Mr.Rajnish pathiyil



                                                        JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was pronounced by T.RAJA, J.)

This Writ Appeal has been directed against the order dated

27.08.2013 made in W.P.No.7543 of 2013 by a learned Single Judge of this

Court.

2. At the outset, a perusal of the records would go to show that on the

past two hearings, namely, on 08.07.2021 and 09.07.2021 there was no

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.2084 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

representation on behalf of the appellant. Therefore, in order to give one

more chance to the appellant, we directed the Registry to post the matter

under the caption, ''for dismissal'' on 13.07.2021. Even today, when the

matter was listed under the caption ''for dismissal'', no one appeared on

behalf of the appellant.

3. Mr.T.Arunkumar, learned Government Advocate, appearing for

the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.Rajnish Pathiyil, learned counsel appearing

for the 4th respondent would also state that the appellant is not interested in

prosecuting the matter.

4. In view of the non-representation on the side of the appellant for

the past three hearings, we are of the view that the appellant is not interested

in prosecuting the matter. Therefore, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed for

default. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is

closed.

                                                                        (T.R.J.,)       (V.S.G.J.,)

                                                                              13.07.2021
                     vsn



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.A.No.2084 of 2013 and M.P.No.1 of 2013

T.RAJA, J.

and V.SIVAGNANAM, J.

vsn

W.A.No.2084 of 2013

and M.P.No.1 of 2013

13.07.2021

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter