Madras High Court
M/S. Sameeraa Foundation Private ... vs A. Prashanth on 29 March, 2022
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 29.03.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DURAISWAMY
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE T.V. THAMILSELVI
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
and C.M.P. No.5297 of 2022
M/s. Sameeraa Foundation Private Limited,
Rep. By its Authorised Signatory
Mr.B.Tiruselvan
No.47, eco House, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 002
Ph. 7904204929
Mail [email protected] ... Appellant
v.
1. A. Prashanth
2. Karthiga
3. M/s. BBCL Private Limited,
Rep. By its Director, Vummidi Bharth
No.20, (Old No.23/2) Mylai Ranganathar Street,
T. Nagar, Chennai – 600 017. ... Respondents
Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal filed under section 58 of TNRERA
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
Act r/w under section 100 of CPC to set aside the order dated
05.01.2022 passed by the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai in M.A.No.1 of 2022 and in A.No.148 of 2021.
For Petitioner : Mr. Subramanian
for Mr.S.Namasivayam
For Respondent : Mr. T.Sundaravadanam
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by M. DURAISWAMY, J.)
Challenging the order passed in M.A.No.1 of 2022 and in
A.No.148 of 2021 on the file of Tamil Nadu Real Estate Appellate
Tribunal, Chennai the 2nd respondent in C.C.P. No.297 of 2019, on the
file of the Tamil Nadu Real Estate Tribunal, has filed the above Civil
Miscellaneous Second Appeal.
2. The Tribunal, in M.A.No.1 of 2022 and in A.No.148 of 2021
observed that in the connected appeal in A.No.132 of 2021, the appellant
was directed to deposit as per the earlier order passed by the Tribunal
and the said amount has to be deposited jointly and severally. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
Tribunal directed the appellants to deposit the amounts on or before
20.01.2022 and posted the matter on 21.01.2022.
3. Since the appellant failed to comply with the orders of the
Tribunal, by order dated 21.01.2022, the Appellate Tribunal, following
the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Judgment
reported in CDJ 2021 SC 906 [M/s. Newtech Promoters & Developers
Pvt. Ltd. V State of UP and others] , declined to extend the time for
depositing the amount and dismissed the appeals.
4. Now, the appellant has challenged only the order dated
05.01.2022 passed by the Appellate Tribunal.
5. Since the appellant had sufficient time i.e. more than a year to
comply with the order passed by he Adjudicating Officer, the appellate
tribunal has rightly rejected the request of the appellant seeking for
extension of time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
6. In these circumstances, following the ratio laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment cited supra, we do not find any
ground to interfere with the order passed by the appellate tribunal. The
Civil Miscellaneous Second Appeal is liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[M.D., J.] [T.V.T.S., J.]
29.03.2022
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
Rj
To
The Tamil Nadu Real State Appellate Tribunal,
Chennai.
M. DURAISWAMY, J.
and
T.V. THAMILSELVI, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
Rj
C.M.S.A.No.23 of 2022
and C.M.P. No.5297 of 2022
29.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
