The petitioner sought to stay execution proceedings pending the decision on an application for impleadment. The High Court held that such matters are within the discretion of the Executing Court and the High Court cannot intervene unless there is a jurisdictional error, thereby dismissing the petition.
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.
CRP No.2041 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.09.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
CRP No.2041 of 2024 & CMP.No.10908 of 2024
M/s.AEE Casting Ltd., Represented by its Director, K.Vijayalakshimi
: Petitioner versus
1.S.P.Nachiappan 2.S.Venkatesan : Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to direct the learned Principal District Court, Chengalpet to keep the attachment proceedings in EP.No.142 of 2022 pending on the file of the learned Principal District court, Chengalpet in abeyance till disposal of EA.No.6 of 2023 in E.P.No.142 of 2022 on the file of the Principal District Court, Chengalpet.
For Petitioner : Ms.Aanchal M. Nichani
For Respondent 1 : Mr.S.Mukund, Senior Counsel, for Mr.N.Damodaran
For Respondent 2 : Mr.S.Venkatesan
Page 1 of 6
CRP No.2041 of 2024
ORDER
This is a case where compromise memo had been entered into by the civil revision petitioner on 08.02.2020. Pursuant to the compromise, the first respondent, S.P.Nachiappan agreed to receive a sum of Rs.75,00,000/- and transfer 2100 equity shares that was held by the said Nachiappan in the first defendant company in favour of the plaintiff, Mr.S.Venkatesan who is the second respondent herein.
N.Murugappan, namely the second and third defendants, will not interfere in the affairs of the first defendant/company. They were also called upon to withdraw the review application filed by them in RA.No.115 of 2013 in Company Appeal No.19 of 2009 then pending before this Court.
Page 2 of 6
CRP No.2041 of 2024
namely Jayashankari. As the terms of the compromise were not adhered to, an execution petition was levied in E.P.No.142 of 2022 on the file of the Principal District Court at Chengalpet.
Page 3 of 6
CRP No.2041 of 2024
herself. This Court cannot step into the shoes of the learned Principal District judge unless and until any action has been taken without jurisdiction or no action has been taken despite being vested with such jurisdiction.
Page 4 of 6
CRP No.2041 of 2024
position to come to the rescue of Ms.Aanchal M.Nichani's client.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
02.09.2024
nl
Index : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No
To
1.The Principal District Court, Chengalpet.
Page 5 of 6
CRP No.2041 of 2024
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
nl
CRP No.2041 of 2024
02.09.2024
Page 6 of 6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application for impleadment is maintainable before an Executing Court.
Whether the High Court can direct the Executing Court to keep proceedings in abeyance pending adjudication of the impleadment application.
M/s.AEE Casting Ltd., Represented by its Director, K.Vijayalakshimi
S.P.Nachiappan
S.Venkatesan
V.Lakshminarayanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
