M.Dhavamani vs The Director — WMP(MD)/6839/2026

Case under Others Section others. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

Next hearing 16-Jun-2026

CNR: HCMD010430172026

Filing Number

WMP(MD)/26388/2026

Filing Date

24-Mar-2026

Registration No

WMP(MD)/6839/2026

Registration Date

25-Mar-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

Coram

Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Service ( 140 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section others

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M.Dhavamani

    Adv. K.K.KANNAN,A.V.NANCY,A.V.NANCY, ,C.K.LATHA,K.V.Subramanian ,S.Arun Kumar ,J.Jonath Aakash ,M.VIJAYA SUNDARA PANDIYAN,SAKTHI KIRUBA S M,A.V.NANCY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Director

  2. 2.The Joint Director

  3. 3.The Chief Medical Officer

  4. 4.Indian Medical Association

  5. 5.Manikandan

  6. 6.The Branch Manager

Case History

  1. 16-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    oOo

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer KumarView PDF

    The impleading petition was dismissed. The court found that the cause of action regarding amounts in the deceased daughter's State Bank of India account was independent from the main writ petition concerning benefits due to the deceased, and therefore could not be adjudicated together. The petitioner was left open to pursue appropriate legal remedies separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  4. 02-Jun-2026

    xixixix

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

  5. 28-Apr-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 24-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WMP(MD)/6839/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The impleading petition was dismissed. The court found that the cause of action regarding amounts in the deceased daughter's State Bank of India account was independent from the main writ petition concerning benefits due to the deceased, and therefore could not be adjudicated together. The petitioner was left open to pursue appropriate legal remedies separately. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case