Allowed

Wind World India Limited v. Rajendran

Madras HC3 Jun 2026CMP(MD)/10032/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This condonation petition seeking leave to file a Second Appeal after a delay of 814 days was allowed. The court accepted administrative reasons, pending execution proceedings, and mediation attempts as sufficient cause for the delay, directing registration and listing of the Second Appeal.

What did the court decide?

Condonation of delay of 814 days in filing Second Appeal; Registry to number Second Appeal and list for admission.

Wind World India Limited Vs Rajendran — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

CMP(MD). No.10032 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 03/06/2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶6

CMP(MD). No.10032 of 2025 in SA(MD)SR.No.49895 of 2025

¶7

Wind World India Limited ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

Rajendran

¶10

Muthaiah

¶11

Packiadurai

¶12

Superintending Engineer

¶13

Executive Engineer,

¶14

Wind Energy Development Cell Tamilnadu Electricity Board, Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli-627 002. ... Respondents

¶15

PRAYER :- To condone the delay of 814 days in filing SA(MD)Sr.No. 49895/2025 and pass such other or further orders.

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr. M.Dhamodaran, Advocate.

¶17

For Respondents 4 & 5 : Mr.B. Ramanathan, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This petition has been filed seeking condonation of a delay of 814

¶20

1/3

¶21

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

¶22

CMP(MD). No.10032 of 2025

¶23

days in preferring the Second Appeal.

¶24

Despite service of notice on the contesting respondents / plaintiffs, who have succeeded concurrently before the Courts below, they have not chosen to enter appearance at the stage of consideration of the delay condonation petition.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a private limited company and that, although the copy application was made ready on 02.01.2023, it had to be forwarded to the Head Office for necessary instructions and approval for preferring a Second Appeal. Further, obtaining a legal opinion from the panel advocate also consumed considerable time, resulting in the delay in filing the Second Appeal.

¶26

According to the petitioner, the Execution Petition is still pending and the parties have also been referred to mediation. The respondents are, therefore, well aware of the pendency of the proposed

¶27

2/3

¶28

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

¶29

CMP(MD). No.10032 of 2025

¶30

Second Appeal.

¶31

In the light of the above circumstances, and considering the fact

¶32

that the decree contains a mandatory direction against the petitioner, this Court is satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown for the delay. The delay having been adequately explained on account of administrative reasons, this Court is inclined to condone the same.

¶33

Accordingly, this Petition is allowed and the delay of 814 days

¶34

in filing the Second Appeal is condoned.

¶35

03.06.2026

¶36

TRP

¶37

Note : Registry is directed to number the Second Appeal if it is otherwise

¶38

in order and list it for admission in the usual course.

¶39

3/3

¶40

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

Wind World India Limited v. Rajendran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Wind World India Limited v. Rajendran

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

S.Subbiah Vs Sivasami Thevar (Died) 2. P.Pandian (Died) 3. State of Tamilnadu

Shiek Mohideen Vs The Idol of a/m. Navaneetha Krishnasamy

C.Balasubramanian Vs T.Rajammal

Rathinam (Died) 1. R.Krishnanandam Vs Valliammai (Died) Jegannathan (Died) 1. Periyasamy

Muthu Asari Vs K.Anbalagan

Paritha begam Vs Sangeetha Be.