Madras High Court
Chaya Industries Ltd vs M/S.Owners And Parties ... on 22 June, 2021
C.S.No.665 of 2000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
C.S.No.665 of 2000
Chaya Industries Ltd.,
Rep. by T.Raghunathan,
Managing Director,
New Industrial Development Area,
Kanjikode,
Palakkad – 678 621. ...Plaintiff
.Vs.
1.M/s.Owners and Parties Interested
in the vessel M.V.AAA.Pregress
Rep. by its Master now at the
Port of Tuticorin,
Tamilnadu.
2.M/s.Coolwear Pvt. Ltd.,
Hawaanna Road,
S.Hulhudhoo Addu Atool,
Republic of Maldives.
3.M/s.Hazash Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.,
No.1-05, Ship Plaza,
Orchid Magu.Male-2002,
Republic of Maldives.
... Defendants
Page No.1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.665 of 2000
Plaint filed under Order XLII Rule III of the High Court Original
Side Rules praying for a judgment and decree against the defendants 1 to
3 jointly and severally:
a) For a sum of Rs.8,61,584/- together with interest at the rate of
24% per annum from the date of plaint till the date of realization in full,
b) For arrest of the vessel M.V.AAA.Pregress in as is where is
condition, presently in Indian Waters at the Port of tuticorin together
with her hull, tackle, gear, engines, machines and equipment thereon and
all the things and articles aboard the said vessel including other
paraphernalia on board
c) For order of the sale of the said vessel together with the
equipments and accessories mentioned above and to direct the sale
proceeds to be adjusted or applied in or towards the satisfaction of the
claim of the plaintiff with further interest at the above rate from the date
of the suit till the date of payment in the event of the non payment of the
amount by the defendants
d) If the sale proceeds are insufficient, to satisfy the amount
decreed, for a personal decree against the defendants 2 and 3 and
e) For costs of the suit.
For Plaintiff : No appearance
For Defendants : Mr.Irwin Aaron for D1
********
Page No.2/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.665 of 2000
JUDGMENT
Mr.Chandrasekaran, learned counsel representing
Mr.S.Thiruvenkataswamy had on 22.04.2021 represented that the papers
have been returned to the plaintiff. The Registry was directed to find out
as to whether any new counsel has entered appearance. The name of the
plaintiff has been printed in the cause list. The suit is of the year 2000, it
is clear that the plaintiff is not interest in prosecuting the suit.
2. Therefore, the suit is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
22.06.2021
dsa
Index : No
Internet : Yes
Non-speaking order
Page No.3/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.665 of 2000
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiff: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the plaintiff : Nil
List of the witnesses examined on the side of the defendants: Nil
List of Exhibits marked on the side of the defendants: Nil
22.06.2021
dsa
Page No.4/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
C.S.No.665 of 2000
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
dsa
C.S.No.665 of 2000
22.06.2021
Page No.5/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
