Madras High CourtA/1977/2017dismissed

P.Ramesh v. Mr.Suresh Babu

2018-08-21Honourable Mr Justice M. Govindaraj3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION) TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST 2018 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ A.No.1977 of 2017 in C.S.D.No.3850 of 2017 P.Ramesh, aged about 47 years, S/o.N.Pattabiraman No.2, Kumaran Street, J.B.Estate, Avadi, Chennai 600 054.

... Applicant/Plaintiff -Versus1. Mr.Suresh Babu aged about 46 years residing at Plot 2692, TNHB, Avadi, Chennai 600 054.

Also at Sri Krishna Mahal, Plot No./PC, 2/3, TNHB Paruthipattu Village, Avadi, Chennai 600 054

2. S.Selvadurai - Cheif Manager REPCO Bank Limited No.153, Kothai Complex, N.M.Road, Avadi, Chennai 600 054.

3. The General Manager - Admin REPCO Bnak Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

4. The General manager - HR, REPCO Bnak Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

5. The Chief General Manager, REPCO Bnak Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

6. The Executive Director, REPCO Bnak Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

7. The Managing Director, REPCO Bnak Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017

8. REPCO Bank Limited, REPCO Tower, No.33, North Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai 600 017 ... Respondents/Defendants A.No.1977 of 2017 Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant leave to sue the 1st and 2nd Respondents in the above suit.

c) Why such further or other order in the circumstances of the case should not be passed. d) Why the Summons may not be served through Central Nazier, Sub Court, Poonamallee.

This Application coming on this day before this court for hearing the court made the following order: The applicant/plaintiff has filed a suit claiming damages along with interest for the default committed by the defendants.

2. The first defendant has filed a counter to the application. Whereas, it is seen that no cause of action has arisen against respondent Nos. 2 to 8.

3. In view of the same, leave to sue against respondent

Nos.2 to 8 cannot be granted. Since the first defendant is residing at Avadi, the applicant has to proceed against him before the jurisdictional Court.

4. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. It is open to the applicant to approach the appropriate forum. Sd/- M.G.R.J 21.08.2018 //Certified to be a true copy// Dated this the day of 2018. KY/28.08.2018 COURT OFFICER From 25.09.2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Order/Judgment Decree in this format.