Allowed¶18

The Managing Director v. Eswari

Madras HC3 Mar 2026CMP(MD)/11805/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; CMP(MD) No. 11805 of 2025 in CMA(MD)SR.No.11990 of 2025; N. Anand Venkatesh J. and P. Dhanabal J.; condonation of 251 days' delay in filing CMA; conditional condonation with cost of Rs. 1,000/- payable to Madras High Court Madurai Bench Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association within one week; TNSTC Madurai Division-I as petitioner/appellant; Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. as R-3; notice to R-2 dispensed with; decided 03-03-2026.

What did the court decide?

Delay of 251 days in filing C.M.A.(MD).S.R.No.11990 of 2025 condoned, subject to payment of Rs.1,000/- as cost within one week. ¶18

The Managing Director Vs Eswari — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

CMP(MD) NO. 11805 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03-03-2026 CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.DHANABAL

¶4

CMP(MD) No. 11805 of 2025

¶5

¶6

CMA(MD)SR.No.11990 of 2025

¶7

The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State transport Corporation Madurai Division -I Bye Pass Road, Madurai.

¶8

Petitioner

¶9

¶10

1.Eswari 2.Chellam 3.The Branch Manager Reliance General Insurance Co -Ltd. Sri Meenakshi Plaza 1st Floor Plot No.HIG 55, 80 Feet Road, Anna Nagar, Madurai - 625 020. Respondents For Petitioner: Mr.S.Micheal Heldon Kumar

¶11

For Respondents For R-3 : Mr.K.Sakthivel For R-1 and R-2 : No Appearance Prayer:

¶12

To condone the delay of 251 days in filing the appeal in C.M.A.(MD).S.R.No.11990 of 2025 and thus render justice.

¶13

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

¶14

ORDER

¶15

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble N.Anand Venkatesh J.)

¶16

This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 251 days in filing the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

¶17

Notice was ordered to the respondents on 25.07.2025. Respondents 1 and 3 are represented through their counsels. Insofar as the notice sent to R-2 is concerned, the same has been returned. Respondent No.2, who is the owner of the vehicle, remained ex parte before the Tribunal. Hence, we are inclined to dispense with any further notice to respondent No.2 in this petition.

¶18

Considering the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit filed in support of the petition, the petition is allowed, however, we are inclined to impose a condition. Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the petitioner / appellant to pay cost of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) in favour of Madras High Court Madurai Bench Advocate Clerk's Welfare Association (Account No.496039124 – High Court Branch, Madurai) (IFSC- IDIB000H040) within a period of one week from today. Subject to the said payment, the delay is condoned.

¶19

(N.ANAND VENKATESH J.) & (P.DHANABAL J.) 03-03-2026

¶20

TSG

¶21

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

The Managing Director v. Eswari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Managing Director v. Eswari

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

Highcourt Raja Vs Thangam

Manikandan Vs State Of Tamilnadu Rep By Inspector Of Police, Koodal Pudur

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Pandaram(Died)

Murugesh Vs The Inspector of Police

The Managing Director Vs Eswari

The Managing Director Vs Minor.Logesh