Allowed¶24

Sss Hi tech Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Rak Ceramics India Private Ltd.

Madras HC25 Feb 2026A/927/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy J., 25-02-2026; Section 80(2) CPC leave application allowed; dispensing with Section 80(1) prior notice to second respondent Central Public Works Department (Executive Engineer, CPWD, JIPMER Academic Campus, Karaikal); applicant/intending plaintiff SSS Hi tech Construction Pvt Ltd; proposed Commercial Division money suit C.S.(Comm.Div.) SR.No.17005 of 2026 against RAK Ceramics India Private Ltd for Rs.1,41,36,070/- plus interest; Registry directed to number the suit if otherwise in order; brief order, no case citations, no dissent.

What did the court decide?

Leave under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to institute the proposed suit without serving notice to the second respondent (CPWD); Registry directed to number the suit if otherwise in order. ¶24

Sss Hi tech Construction Pvt. Ltd. Vs Rak Ceramics India Private Ltd. — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the intending plaintiff should be granted leave to dispense with notice under Section 80 CPC insofar as the second respondent (CPWD) is concerned, so as to institute the proposed recovery suit without serving the Section 80(1) notice on it.

¶22

Court's answer

Leave was granted as prayed for: having considered that the suit claim is directed against the first respondent, that the second respondent was arrayed only because certain communications were addressed to it, and that the delay caused by serving the Section 80 notice would defeat the object of the suit, the court allowed the application to dispense with notice to the second respondent.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

As a corollary to the leave granted, the Registry was directed to number the suit, if otherwise in order.

¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (order dated 25-02-2026, Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, J.): Allowed A No. 927 of 2026 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) SR.No.17005 of 2026 and granted the applicant, SSS Hi tech Construction Pvt Ltd (intending plaintiff), leave under Section 80(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to institute its proposed suit for recovery of Rs.1,41,36,070/- with interest from RAK Ceramics India Private Ltd without serving the Section 80(1) notice on the second respondent, Central Public Works Department. Grounds considered: the suit claim is directed against the first respondent; the second respondent was arrayed only because certain communications were addressed to it; and the delay occasioned by serving the notice would defeat the object of the suit. The Registry was directed to number the suit, if otherwise in order. Short interlocutory order; no precedents discussed; single-member bench; no dissent.

¶1

A No. 927 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25-02-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶6

A No. 927 of 2026 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) SR.No.17005 of 2026

¶7

SSS Hi tech Construction Pvt Ltd Rep.by its Managing Director Mr.N.Srinivasan No.678, Tonndiarpet High Road, New Washermenpet, Chennai 600 081.

¶8

..Applicant(s)

¶9

¶10

RAK Ceramics India Private Ltd Rep.by its CEO Mr.Anil Kumar Beejawat, Having Office at 1st and 2nd Floor, Amient House, Kodambakkam High Road, Chennai 34.

¶11

Central Public Works Department Rep.by Executive Engineer, CPWD Utility Building, JIPMER Academic Campus, Karaikal 609 602.

¶12

..Respondent(s)

¶13

PRAYER : To grant leave to the Applicant/Plaintiff under Section 80(2) of the

¶14

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to institute the accompanying suit without serving the notice to 2nd Defendant under section 80(1) of the CPC in C.S. (Comm.Div) D.No.17005 of 2026.

¶15

M/s.G.Vairava Subramanian

¶16

Page1 of 2

¶17

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

¶18

A No. 927 of 2026

¶19

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.

¶20

RNA

¶21

ORDER

¶22

In a proposed suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.1,41,36,070/- (Rupees One Crore Forty One Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Seventy only) with interest thereon from the first respondent, the intending plaintiff has requested for leave to dispense with notice under Section 80 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) insofar as the second respondent is concerned.

¶23

In the affidavit in support of the application, it is stated that the suit claim is directed against the first respondent and that the second respondent has been arrayed as a party because certain communications have been addressed to the said party. It is also stated that the delay that would be caused by serving notice under Section 80 of CPC would defeat the object of the suit.

¶24

Considering the aforesaid, this application is allowed as prayed for. As a corollary, the Registry is directed to number the suit, if otherwise in order.

¶25

25-02-2026

¶26

RNA

¶27

A No. 927 of 2026 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) SR.No.17005 of 2026

¶28

__________ Page2 of 2

¶29

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