Allowed

The Management v. Subbaian v

Madras HC22 Oct 2025WP(MD)/7007/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench set aside the Labour Court's attachment order against the petitioner society. This was because an interim order already granted installment relief and directed the return of seized items, rendering the current writ petition unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Impugned attachment order set aside with liberty to petitioner to work out remedy in execution petition before Labour Court.

The Management Vs Subbaian v — Execution and Attachment | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 22.10.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶7

The Management, NN.629,Sirugambaiyur Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society, Rep by its President, Oriyur, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanthapuram District.

...Petitioner

V.Subbaian

...Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relting to the impugned order passed in EP No.18 of 2020 in CP.No.96 of 2008, dated 09.02.2023 and quash the same and consequently directing the Labour Court, Madurai to permit the petitioner to pay the award amount on installment basis.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi.D For Respondent : Mr.R.Saravanan No.1

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner society has filed this writ petition as against the order of attachment passed by the Labour Court in EP.No.18 of 2020 in CP.No.96 of 2008 attaching the movable properties of the petitioner society by its order dated 09.02.2023.

¶19

2.This court has granted an order interim stay on production of a demand draft for a sum of Rs.Two lakh by the petitioner society. This court in the interim order dated 03.04.2023 has stated as follows:

¶20

“Since bonafide has been shown and some installment benefit can be given at the time of final hearing, there shall be an order of interim stay. There is a direction to the Labour Court to return the seized items.”

¶21

3.Since the interim order itself has been passed by way of a final

¶22

order enabling the parties to work out their remedy in the final hearing before the Labour Court by availing the installment benefit, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to work out their remedy in the execution petition in claim petition before the Labour

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶26

Court. Accordingly the impugned order is set aside.

¶27

4.With the above direction, this writ petition is closed. No costs.

¶28

Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶29

22.10.2025

¶30

DSK

¶31

To The Management, NN.629,Sirugambaiyur Primary Agricultural Co-Operative Credit Society, Rep by its President, Oriyur, Thiruvadanai Taluk, Ramanthapuram District.

¶32

3/4

¶33

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

¶34

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶35

B.PUGALENDHI.J.,

¶36

DSK

¶37

WP(MD)No.7007 of 2023

¶38

22.10.2025

¶39

4/4

¶40

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

The Management v. Subbaian v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Management v. Subbaian v

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivakasi Municipal Corporation Vs The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Mohamed Eakieem Vs The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner /

M/s. Aluminium Powder Co. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Director

Gnanasekaran .G Vs The Managing Director

The Management Vs The Secretary

The Management Vs General Secretary