The Federal Bank Ltd vs Mr. Ilavzhagan
2022 Latest Caselaw 4422 Mad

                                                                     1                 C.S.No.80 of 2002

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED : 07.03.2022

                                                            CORAM

                          THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

                                                       C.S.No.80 of 2002


                     The Federal Bank Ltd.,
                     25, Nelson Manicka Mudaliar Road,
                     Rajaram Mehta Nagar, Madras-600 029
                     Rep. by its Chief Manager.                                             ...Plaintiff

                                                               .Vs.
                     1.Mr. Ilavzhagan,

                     2.Mrs. V. Rathinam                                                  ... Defendants


                     Prayer:

                                  Plaint filed under Order VII Rule 1 of the CPC, 1908 read with

                     Order XXXVII of the Original Side Rules praying for a judgment and

                     decree as follows:-

                                  a) Directing the defendants jointly and severally to pay the plaintiff
                     the said sum of Rs.2,23,612/- together with interest thereon at the rate of
                     16.25 per cent per annum with quarterly rests from this date until
                     payment and the plaintiff's costs of the suit before a date to be fixed by

                                                                 1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                     2                  C.S.No.80 of 2002

                     this Ho'ble court and in the event of their failure to do so, ordering the
                     scheduled II property to be sold and applying the net proceeds thereof in
                     satisfaction of the amount of the decree with interests and costs and in
                     the event of deficiency, permitting the plaintiff to obtain a decree against
                     the defendants jointly and severally for the said deficiency, together with
                     interest;


                                  b) Without prejudice to the plaintiff's right of seizure and sale,
                     without the intervention of this Hon'ble Court, directing the sale of
                     scheduled I Goods and Machinery lying at premises of the 1st defendant
                     at No.66, Irusapppan Street, Vivekananda Illam, Madras 600 005 and
                     applying the net proceeds thereof in part satisfaction of the amount to be
                     decreed;
                                  c) granting the plaintiff such further or other reliefs as this Hon'ble
                     High Court may, in the circumstances of the case, deems just and
                     necessary.


                                        For Plaintiff       : No Appearance

                                        For Defendants      : No Appearance

                                                            ********




                                                                 2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                  3                C.S.No.80 of 2002

                                                      JUDGMENT

When the matter was listed on 09.02.2022, there was no

representation on behalf of the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit. Hence, the

matter was adjourned to 01.03.2022. When the matter came up for

hearing on 01.03.2022, there was no representation for the plaintiff and

the Registry was directed to print the name of the Counsel Mr.A.R.

Nagarajan & Mrs. S. Jayakumari on behalf of the Defendants 1 & 2 and

the matter was directed to be listed on 03.03.2022.

2. When the matter was taken up on 03.03.2022 for hearing, there

was no representation for both sides. Hence, the matter was directed to be

listed on 07.03.2022 under the caption for dismissal.

3. Despite the same, even today, there is no representation on

behalf of the plaintiff and the defendants either through counsel or in

person.

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

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J., Lbm

4. In view of the above, the aforesaid Civil Suit stands dismissed

for non prosecution. No costs.

                                                                                         07.03.2022
                     Lbm
                     Index              : No
                     Internet           : Yes
                     Speaking order




                                                                                 C.S.No.80 of 2002

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