The High Court dismissed a writ petition for default due to the absence of the petitioner and respondent's counsel at the hearing, leaving the matter unrepresented.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.02.2017
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
W.P.No.28157 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.24291 of 2016
M/s.Rathna Stores (P) Limited,
Rep. by its Director S.Siva Sundar .. Petitioner
M/s.UCO Bank,
Rep. by its Chief Manager, MID Corporate Branch,
No.67, Burkit Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 17 .. Respondent
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent herein to consider the proposal given by the petitioner dated 22.07.2016, and enable the petitioner to make the payment of its dues as per the schedule given in the proposal.
For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondent : Mrs.T.Hemalatha for Mr.V.Suthakar
ORDER (Order of the Court was made by S.MANIKUMAR, J.)
Borrower, who had failed to repay the loan availed from M/s.UCO Bank, Chennai / respondent, has sought for a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to consider the proposal dated 22.07.2016, so as to enable payment of dues.
s/dAssistant Registrar(CS-II)
//True Copy//
Sub-Assistant Registrar
W.P.No.28157 of 2016
and
W.M.P.No.24291 of 2016
SV(CO)
sp/24/2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.Rathna Stores (P) Limited
M/s.UCO Bank
S. Manikumar
M. Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
