Mr.S.C.Sanjeev Kumar v. Denwood Merchandising And Industries

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL IN CS No.443 of 2018

1. Mr.S.C.Sanjeev Kumar S/o.M.C.Chandrasekaran Partner M/s.Sambandam And Sons At No.19 South Road West C.I.T.Nagar Chennai 600 035.

Applicant(s) Vs

1. Denwood Merchandising And Industries Represented by its authorised representative Mr.P.Deepak Kothari, No.C-13/11, 2nd Floor, 10th Street, C Block, Anna Nagar East, Chennai 600 102.

Respondent(s) PRAYER : To condone the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal application D.10432/2021 in C.S.No.443 of 2018. For Applicant(s):

M/S.R. Sathish Kumar Meha Varshini M.R.

Sridharshini S For Respondent:

Ms.Anukriti Anand

for Mr.Sharath Chandran

ORDER

This application has been filed by the applicant to condone the delay of 13 days in filing the appeal application D.10432/2021 in C.S.No.443 of 2018.

2. According to the applicant, he is the defendant in the main suit and filed the suit for recovery of money. He filed the application requesting the learned Master for extension of time for payment and for complying the conditional order. In fact, learned Master directed the applicant to pay a sum of Rs.1,04,79,000/- in four installments. The applicant is unable to pay the first installment and thereby filed applications for modification and for extension of time. Those applications were dismissed on 19.11.2020. As against the said orders, the applicant has preferred applications along with the present application to condone the delay of 13 days. Therefore, filed this application.

3. According to the respondent, the main petition filed by the petitioner challenging the orders passed by the learned Master itself is not

maintainable. Therefore, the application filed for condonation of delay is also not maintainable and they have to approach the appropriate forum as against the orders passed by the learned Master. Therefore, this application is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed. There is no sufficient reasons stated by the applicant to condone the delay of 13 days.

4. This Court heard both sides and perused the records.

5. Considering the above said reasons stated by the applicant, though the respondent counsel seriously objected, this Court is of the view that since this petition is for condonation of delay in filing the appeal application D.10432/2021 the maintainability can be decided in the main petition. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit and considering the number of days in delay, it is appropriate to allow this application. Accordingly, this application is allowed.

6. Registry is directed to number the application if it is otherwise in order.

30-01-2026 mtl

P. DHANABAL, J., mtl IN CS No.443 of 2018 30.01.2026