The DGM (T) and Project Director Su.Srinivasan vs The District Collector and Sole Arbitrator (LA) — CMP/13521/2026

Case under U/s 149 of Cpc Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DELAY CONDONED on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMA010400032026

Filing Number

CMP/29556/2026

Filing Date

17-Feb-2026

Registration No

CMP/13521/2026

Registration Date

02-Jun-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan , Honourable Mrs.Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi

Coram

Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan , Honourable Mrs.Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi

Bench Type

Division Bench

Judicial Branch

JUDICIALSECTION

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DELAY CONDONED

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

U/s 149 of Cpc Section 1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.The DGM (T) and Project Director Su.Srinivasan

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The District Collector and Sole Arbitrator (LA)

  2. 2.The Competent Authority and

  3. 3.Ilamurugu

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN,Honourable Mrs.Justice K. Govindarajan ThilakavadiView PDF

    The Madras High Court granted the petitioner's miscellaneous petition to condone a delay of 597 days in paying the deficit court fee of Rs. 15,725 in an arbitration appeal. After hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing the supporting affidavit, the court was satisfied with the petitioner's explanations and allowed the delay to be overlooked. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jun-2026

    To Condone Delay In Deficit Court Fee

    Honourable Mr Justice P. Velmurugan , Honourable Mrs.Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi

  4. 17-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CMP/13521/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madras High Court granted the petitioner's miscellaneous petition to condone a delay of 597 days in paying the deficit court fee of Rs. 15,725 in an arbitration appeal. After hearing arguments from both sides and reviewing the supporting affidavit, the court was satisfied with the petitioner's explanations and allowed the delay to be overlooked. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case