Disposed

Raajendira Namalwar v. T. Udayakumar

Madras HC20 Sept 2024OSA/75/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Original Side Appeal against an arbitration-related order was settled before Mediation. The court deleted the arbitrator from the party array, recorded the settlement endorsement and disposed of the appeal as withdrawn/closed as settled in Mediation.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed as withdrawn/settled in Mediation; refund of court fee to appellant under Section 69-A TN Court Fees Act within four weeks.

Raajendira Namalwar Vs T. Udayakumar — Arbitration | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 20.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR

¶6

and

¶7

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN

¶8

THILAKAVADI

¶9

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶10

Raajendira Namalwar S/o.Late S.Nammalwar

¶11

... Appellant

¶12

Vs.

¶13

T.Udayakumar S/o.K.Thulasingam

¶14

The Hon'ble Justice Mrs.Praba Sridevan Former Judge Madras High Court No.7, Krishnaswami Avenue Luz, Mylapore Chennai-600 004. .. Respondents

¶15

(R2 deleted vide order dated 24.06.2024 in O.S.A.No.75 of 2021)

¶16

Original Side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read with Section 37(1)(c) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, praying to set aside the

¶17

Page Nos.1/6

¶18

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

¶19

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶20

order and decreetal order made in O.P.No.1171 of 2018 dated 18.05.2020 on the file of this Hon'ble Court (O.S) thereby set aside the award passed by the second respondent dated 10.07.2018 and pass a meaningful award / decree in favour of the appellant.

¶21

For Appellant : Mr.R.Thiagarajan For Respondent : Mr.S.Ramesh

¶22

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

[Judgment of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.,]

¶25

Captioned matter is listed under the cause list caption 'FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT / WITHDRAWAL OR ARGUMENTS'.

¶26

In and by an order dated 24.06.2024, R2 has been deleted. Registry

¶27

ought to have made suitable endorsement in the case file but the same has not been done. Let the needful be done now before uploading / before issue

¶28

of certified copies.

¶29

Be that as it may, order dated 24.06.2024 reads as follows:

¶30

'O.S.A. No.75 of 2021

¶31

M.SUNDAR,J., and

¶32

Page Nos.2/6

¶33

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

¶34

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶35

K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.,

¶36

(Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR, J.)

¶37

Ms.Vasudha Thiagarajan, learned counsel for appellant and Mr.Nikhil A.S., learned counsel representing Mr.S.Ramesh, counsel on record for first respondent are before us.

¶38

2. Applying Vinay Heavy Equipments principle [ Zonal. Gen.Manager, Ircon Inter. Natnl. Ltd., vs. Vinay Heavy Equipments reported in 2007 SCC OnLine SC 4 and Zonal General Manager, Ircon International Limited Vs. Vinay Heavy Equipments reported in (2015) 13 SCC 680 ] we delete the Hon'ble sole Arbitrator from the array of parties. Registry to not to show the name of Hon'ble sole Arbitrator in the cause list from next listing. Therefore, R1 now becomes sole respondent.

¶39

3. Learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for sole respondent submitted in one voice that possibility of giving a closure to the matter is being explored and made a common request for listing one week hence. Request acceded to.

¶40

4. List one week hence under the cause list caption 'FOR REPORTING SETTLEMENT OR ARGUMENTS' on 01.07.2024.'

¶41

This means that R1 [T.Udayakumar] has now become sole respondent.

¶42

Mr.R.Thiagarajan, learned counsel on record for sole appellant and

¶43

Page Nos.3/6

¶44

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

¶45

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶46

Mr.S.Ramesh, learned counsel for lone respondent are before us.

¶47

At the request of both sides, captioned matter was referred to

¶48

Mediation.

¶49

Today, aforementioned both learned counsel submit in one voice that the captioned matter has been settled before Mediation, saying so, an endorsement has been made by learned counsel on record for appellant and the same has been counter signed by learned counsel for lone respondent. A

¶50

scanned reproduction of the same is as follows:

¶51

Page Nos.4/6

¶52

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

¶53

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶54

As regards refund of Court fee, in the light of Section 69-A of 'Tamil Nadu Court-Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (Tamil Nadu Act XIV of 1955)' (hereinafter 'TN Court Fees Act' for the sake of brevity), appellant is entitled to refund of Court fee.

¶55

Registry to process the refund of Court fee and ensure that refund is made by way of an instrument drawn in favour of appellant as expeditiously as the business of Registry would permit but in any event within four weeks from today i.e., by 18.10.2024. Refund is subject only to statutory deductions, if any and it is obviously subject to learned counsel for appellant complying with procedural requirements.

¶56

Captioned OSA disposed of in the aforesaid manner i.e., disposed of as withdrawn / closed as settled in Mediation. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶57

(M.S.,J.) (K.G.T.,J.) 20.09.2024

¶58

Index : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶59

¶60

Page Nos.5/6

¶61

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

¶62

O.S.A.No.75 of 2021

¶63