Allowed

M/s. Swift Tech Engineers(India) Private Limited, Rep.by its Director P.M.Suresh Babu, v. m/s.Bindhu Techflow Solutions Pvt. Limited

Madras HC12 Oct 2022A/4047/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed application seeking refund of Rs.10,18,678/- deposited for a Section 34 petition under the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. Court directed registry to encash fixed deposit and pay proceeds to applicant.

What did the court decide?

Registry directed to refund Rs.10,18,678/- along with interest from F.D. Account No.38976928823.

M/s. Swift Tech Engineers(India) Private Limited, Rep.by… — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

A.No.4047 of 2022

¶2

A.No.4047 of 2022 in O.P.No.254 of 2020

¶3

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

¶4

This application is filed seeking refund of the sum of Rs.10,18,678/-, which was deposited in a fixed deposit account by the applicant/petitioner as a condition precedent for the institution of O.P.No.254 of 2020. By order dated 15.10.2020, the award impugned in the O.P. was set aside. The present application is consequential to it. As is evident from the order in the O.P., the respondents remained ex-parte . In this application, notice was issued to the respondents on 14.09.2022. The said notice was returned unserved with the endorsement “left”. The applicant states that this is the only available address and had been used for communication with the respondents previously. By order dated 14.09.2022, the applicant was also permitted to serve notice through e-mail to the 1^st respondent. The said e-mail was sent. Learned counsel submits that this is the e-mail address on which parties communicated regularly.

¶5

1/3

¶6

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

¶7

A.No.4047 of 2022

¶8

2.While taking into account the fact that the 1^st respondent failed to appear

¶9

in the O.P and has not provided any new address, the matter is proceeded with in the absence of the 1^st respondent.

¶10

3.The applicant seeks refund of the amount deposited as a precondition for the institution of the Section 34 petition, in view of the requirements of the Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. Since the petitioner succeeded in the O.P., the petitioner is entitled to refund of the said sum.

¶11

4.Accordingly, this application is allowed and the Registry is directed to refund the sum of Rs.10,18,678/-, which was deposited in F.D. Account No.38976928823, SBI Porur Branch, in favour of the Registrar General of this Court. The Registry shall take necessary steps to encash the said fixed deposit and pay the proceeds thereof, along with interest accruals thereon, to the applicant.

12.10.2022

2/3

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

¶16

A.No.4047 of 2022

¶17

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

¶18

¶19

A.No.4047 of 2022 in O.P.No.254 of 2020

¶20

12.10.2022

¶21

3/3

¶22

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

M/s. Swift Tech Engineers(India) Private Limited, Rep.by its Director P.M.Suresh Babu, v. m/s.Bindhu Techflow Solutions Pvt. Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Swift Tech Engineers(India) Private Limited, Rep.by its Director P.M.Suresh Babu, v. m/s.Bindhu Techflow Solutions Pvt. Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R Srinivasan, S/o. Rathinasamy Nadar, Vs R Lenin, S/o. a.Rathinasamy

M/s.Vishwa-Syntharo Pharmachem Private Limited Vs M/s.Radiant Pharma

Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. Vs Capco Water Solutions Private Limited

M/s Daimler Financial Servics India Private Limited Vs Jayesh Thakarshi Patel and another

M/s.International Waste Management Pvt.Ltd., Rep.by its authorised signatory Vs M/s.Sara Plast Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its authorised signatory

M/S.Shriram City Union Finance Limited, Rep.by Its Authorised Signatory, Ms.Navinaa P.N. Vs R.Uma