Dismissed

Balaji Fertilizers v. M/S Neyveli Lignite Corpn

Madras HC7 Aug 2019CRP/2541/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a civil revision petition challenging a dismissal of an I.A. for condonation of delay in setting aside an ex parte decree. The court directed the trial court to permit the withdrawal of a decretal amount deposited by the petitioner, advancing the deposit to the respondent in lieu of the decree claims, in consideration of a counter-signed settlement endorsement.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to permit respondent/plaintiff to withdraw Rs.10,00,000/- deposited by petitioner as full satisfaction of the suit decree.

Balaji Fertilizers Vs M/S Neyveli Lignite Corpn — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07.08.2019

¶4

C O R A M

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 &
M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶7

Balaji Fertilizers Rep. By its Proprietor, Shri.Gangahanumaiah ... Petitioner Vs. Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited, Rep. By its Company Secretary ... Respondent

¶8

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order in I.A.No.200 of 2013 in O.S.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the third additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam dated 08.04.2014.

¶9

For Petitioner ... Mr.G.Suryanarayanan For Respondent ... Mr.N.Nithianandan ORDER

¶10

The instant civil revision petition has been filed challenging the

¶11

1/5

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶14

order dismissing the application filed by the petitioner seeking for condonation of delay of 2799 days in filing an application to set aside the ex parte decree. The ex parte decree has been passed against the petitioner under which the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of 10,14,404.39/- together with interest

¶15

and costs. Admittedly, in the execution petition filed by the respondent/plaintiff, the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs.10,00,000/-, pursuant to the order of this court dated 17.07.2014 in this revision.

¶16

The learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff on instructions submits that his client is willing to receive the deposited amount which is lying to the credit of the suit O.S.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the learned Third Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam as full and final settlement of the suit claim and he seeks a direction from this Court to permit him to withdraw the said sum lying to the credit of the suit. He has also made an endorsement to that effect in the court bundle which is extracted hereunder:

¶17

“The respondent herein with approval of competent authority agrees for a settlement and endorses full satisfaction to the decree passed in the suit on receiving the sum of Rs.10,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner to the

¶18

2/5

¶19

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶20

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶21

credit of the suit in terms of the order passed in the CRP. This may be treated as full satisfaction of the decree.”

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner has also counter signed in

¶23

the endorsement and also agreed to the terms of the respondent/plaintiff as

¶24

per the endorsement. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed with a direction to the Trial Court viz., the Third Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore, at Virudhachalam to permit the respondent/plaintiff to withdraw the sum lying to the credit of the said suit after the respondent/plaintiff files a memo to that effect before the Trial Court. No

¶25

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶26

07.08.2019

¶27

Note: Registry is directed to return the original receipts relating to the deposit made by the petitioner/defendant in the suit O.S.No.8 of 2005 to the learned counsel for the respondent/plaintiff to enable him to withdraw the same lying to the credit of the suit.

¶28

¶29

Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking orders

¶30

¶31

3/5

¶32

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶33

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶34

The Third Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuddalore at Virudhachalam

¶35

ABDUL QUDDHOSE. J,

¶36

¶37

CRP (PD) No.2541 of 2014

¶38

4/5

¶39

07.08.2019

¶40

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶41

C.R.P.(NPD) No.2541 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014

¶42

5/5

¶43

http://www.judis.nic.in

Balaji Fertilizers v. M/S Neyveli Lignite Corpn

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balaji Fertilizers v. M/S Neyveli Lignite Corpn

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Dakshinamoorthy Vs E.Janaki

A.R. Sheriff Ahmed - Died Vs G. Balasubramaniam

Subramaniya Chettiar Vs Sivakumar

Devagi Vs Ramachandran

Subramani Vs Kaliappan

Pattabiram Nadargal Iyakkia Vs T.Pandian