Tata Capital Ltd. v. Ragesh C and another

Madras HC4 Mar 2025Arb Appln/491/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for appointment of Advocate Commissioner to repossess vehicle closed due to inability to locate vehicle; liberty to file fresh application once vehicle located; same Advocate Commissioner may be retained.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file a fresh application for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner once the vehicle is located; the court will consider retaining the same Advocate Commissioner. ¶¶20

Tata Capital Ltd. Vs Ragesh C and another — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Arb Appln No. 491 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04-03-2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Arb Appln No. 491 of 2024

¶5

Tata Capital Ltd

¶6

By its Legal Manager D Kalaiarasan Having its office at 1st Floor Centennial Square 6A Dr Ambedkar Salai Kodambakkam Chennai 600 024

¶7

Appellant(s)

¶8

¶9

Ragesh C and another By its Legal Manager D Kalaiarasan Having its office at 1st Floor Centennial Square 6A Dr Ambedkar Salai Kodambakkam Chennai 600 024Chakkumthodi House, Kodalur, Pattambi, Kodalur, Palakkad, Kerala 679 306. and another

¶10

Respondent(s)

¶11

For Appellant(s): Mr.N.K.Vanan For Respondent(s): Ms.A.Shamukasundari: Advocate Commissioner

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

This Court, by its order dated 19.08.2024, appointed an Advocate Commissioner to repossess the vehicle from the respondent or wherever available.

¶14

Till date, the Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court is unable to repossess the vehicle. This Court had already granted extension of time on 12.11.2024, 10.12.2024 & 21.01.2025 to comply with the earlier order dated 19.08.2024.

¶15

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

¶16

¶17

ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J.

¶18

The learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the vehicle has

¶19

not been located and only due to the said reason, the Advocate Commissioner could not repossess the vehicle.

¶20

No useful purpose will be served if this application is allowed to be kept pending. Therefore, this Application is closed. However, liberty is granted to the applicant to file a fresh application seeking for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to repossess the vehicle from the respondent once the vehicle is located. Since the applicant had already paid the initial remuneration to the Advocate Commissioner, this Court shall consider retaining the very same Advocate Commissioner in the fresh application to be filed by the applicant once the vehicle is located.

04-03-2025

vsi

1.Ragesh C and another

¶25

By its Legal Manager D Kalaiarasan Having its office at 1st Floor Centennial Square 6A Dr Ambedkar Salai Kodambakkam Chennai 600 024Chakkumthodi House, Kodalur, Pattambi, Kodalur, Palakkad, Kerala 679 306.

¶26

2.Nithya C V

¶27

Chakkumthodi House, Kodalur, Pattambi, Kodalur, Palakkad, Kerala 679 306.

¶28

Arb Appln No. 491 of 2024

¶29

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

Tata Capital Ltd. v. Ragesh C and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Capital Ltd. v. Ragesh C and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Hareshbhai Keshavbhai Hirapara

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Hareshbhai Keshavbhai Hirapara

M/s.Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Jibesh v L

Principal Chief Materials Manager, Vs M/s.Hindustan Wagon

Tata Capital Ltd. Vs Satheesh Kumar S and another

Cholamandalam Investment And Finance Co. Ltd. Vs Deep Enterprises