D.Samuel Surendran v. Peranandha Perumal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-05-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SOUNTHAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI in CRP SR NO. 61518 OF 2026 D.Samuel Surendran .. Petitioner(s) Vs
1. Peranandha Perumal
2. G.Lokesh
3. S.Rajendran Liquidator, of M/S. Vasavi Housing Infrastructure Limited, 2nd Floor, Hari Krupa, 71/1, MC Nicholos Road, Chetpet, Chennai-31.
..Respondent(s) CRP SR No. 61518 of 2026 D.Samuel Surendran ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. Peranandha Perumal
2. G.Lokesh
3. S.Rajendran Liquidator, of M/S. Vasavi Housing Infrastructure Limited, 2nd Floor, Hari Krupa, 71/1, MC Nicholos Road,
Chetpet, Chennai-31.
..Respondent(s) Prayer: Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 151 of Civil Procedure Code to dispense with filing of Certified copy of the order in IA (IBC)/1056(CHE)/2025 in CP/568/(IB)/(CB)2017, passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench-II and thus render justice. C.R.P. SR. No.61518 of 2026 Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 23.02.2026 passed in IA (IBC)/1056(CHE)/2025 in CP/568/(IB)/(CB)2017, by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench-II and allow the CRP. For Petitioner (s) :
Mr. S.Udhaya Kumar Order (Order of the Court was made by S.Sounthar J.) C.M.P No. 10010 of 2026 is filed, seeking to dispense with the production of the certified copy of the order dated 23.02.2026 passed in I.A. (IBC)/1056(CHE)/2025 in CP/568/(IB)/(CB)/2017 on the file of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai Bench-II.
2. It is seen from the impugned order that the same has been passed, based on the consent given by the counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the counsel for the petitioner never gave any kind of consent for passing the impugned order. If it is the case of the petitioner that the counsel for the petitioner has not given any consent, on instructions of the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to approach the very same forum, seeking for modification of the impugned order. The petitioner is not entitled to say before this Court that recording made by Tribunal is wrong, without approaching very same forum seeking modification.
4. Since the impugned order is the one passed, based on the consent of the counsel, who represented the petitioner before the said forum, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Revision. Therefore, Civil Revision Petition is rejected in SR stage itself with liberty for the petitioner to approach the very same forum. C.M.P. No.10010 of 2026 is closed.
(S.S.,J.) (P.B.B.,J.) 07-05-2026 sp/ab To The National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai Bench-II.
S.SOUNTHAR J.
AND P.B.BALAJI J.
sp/ab in CRP SR NO. 61518 OF 2026 07-05-2026