Bloom Farms Vs Logical Agri Business India (P) Ltd. — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Bloom Farms Vs Logical Agri Business India (P) Ltd. — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dispensation from producing the certified copy of the attachment order dated 24.1.2025 granted as prayed for; Registry directed to number the appeal if otherwise in order; impugned order dated 22.11.2024 (security/attachment before judgment) stayed until 31.03.2025; suit not stayed; matter stood over to 24.03.2025; copy of order marked to the Principal District Court, Namakkal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the application to dispense with production of the certified copy of the order of attachment dated 24.1.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in COS No.2 of 2023 (Principal District Court, Namakkal) should be granted. +2 more

Court's answer

The application to dispense with production of the certified copy of the order of attachment dated 24.1.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in COS No.2 of 2023 on the file of the Principal District Court, Namakkal, is ordered as prayed for.

Ratio / Principle

The Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise found to be in order.

Key takeaways

In view of the solemn statement of counsel for appellant that the impugned order is yet to be executed and attachment is yet to take place, the impugned order dated 22.11.2024 is stayed until 31.03.2025.ratio¶32
If the impugned order has already been executed, the appeal will be dismissed summarily in view of the statement of counsel for appellant; the court clarified that it has not stayed the suit.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

MADRAS HIGH COURT (K.R. Shriram, Chief Justice, author; Mohammed Shaffiq, J.) — C.M.P. No.5288 of 2025 in C.M.A. SR.No.26509 of 2025, Bloom Farms v. Logical Agri Business India (P) Ltd., order dated 10.03.2025: Application to dispense with production of the certified copy of the order of attachment dated 24.1.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in COS No.2 of 2023 on the file of the Principal District Court, Namakkal, ordered as prayed for; Registry directed to number the appeal if otherwise in order. Counsel for appellant (defendant in the suit) stated that the appeal impugns the order dated 22.11.2024 directing the appellant to furnish security for the suit claim, failing which the properties mentioned therein would be subject to attachment before judgment, and that the properties had not yet been attached. On that solemn statement, the impugned order was stayed until 31.03.2025; the court clarified that the suit was not stayed and that, if the order had already been executed, the appeal would be dismissed summarily. Matter stood over to 24.03.2025; copy of the order marked to the Principal District Court, Namakkal. Counsel for respondent stated he had no instructions.

C.M.P. No.5288 of 2025 in C.M.A. SR.No.26509 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ

CMP No.5288 of 2025 and CMA SR No.26509 of 2025

Bloom Farms Rep. by Proprietor, S.Sakthivel, S/o. Sivagurnathan, D.No. 6, 2nd Street, Gokulam Colony, P.N.Pudhur, Coimbatore Town-641041.

Appellant(s)

Vs

Logical Agri Business India (P) Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director,Valsan, D.No. 8/423, Trichy Main Road, Nagarajapuram Village, Vasanthapuram Post, Namakkal Town, Namakkal Taluk.

Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s):

Mr.S.Saravana Kumar

For Respondent(s):

Mr.M.Prem Kumar for Mr.S.Senthil

___________ Page 1 of 3_

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

C.M.P. No.5288 of 2025 in C.M.A. SR.No.26509 of 2025

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

This application filed to dispense with the production of the certified copy of the order of attachment dated 24.1.2025 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in COS No.2 of 2023 on the file of the Principal District Court, Namakkal, is ordered as prayed for.

The Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise found to be in order.

Counsel for appellant, who is the defendant in suit, states this appeal is impugning the order dated 22.11.2024, by which, appellant has been directed to furnish security for the suit claim, failing which the properties mentioned therein would be subject to attachment before judgment.

Counsel for appellant states that the properties have not yet been

___________ Page 2 of 3_

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

C.M.P. No.5288 of 2025 in C.M.A. SR.No.26509 of 2025

attached pursuant to the impugned order.

Counsel for respondent states he has no instructions.

In view of the solemn statement made by counsel for appellant that

order is yet to be executed, inasmuch as attachment is yet to take place, we

stay the impugned order until 31.03.2025.

Stand over to 24.03.2025.

We make it clear that if order has already been executed, we will

dismiss the appeal summarily in view of the statement of counsel for appellant, recorded above. We clarify that we have not stayed the suit.

10.03.2025

Note to Registry: Mark a copy of this order to the Principal District Court, Namakkal sasi/mka

___________ Page 3 of 3_

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