Madras High CourtCMP/22322/2023disposed of

The Branch Manager v. M.Sthanu Shankar

2024-04-01Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose3 pages

in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

The learned counsel for the petitioner in C.M.P. No.22322 of 2023 / 2nd respondent in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017, which has been filed to condone the delay of 187 days in filing the petition seeking to set aside the judgment, dated 09.02.2023 passed in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017 would submit on instructions that the petitioner / 2nd respondent in the appeal, will be satisfied, if the name of the counsel for the petitioner /2nd respondent in the appeal is disclosed in the judgment, dated 09.02.2023 passed in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017. In the said judgment, dated 09.02.2023 the name of the counsel for the petitioner / 2nd respondent in the appeal has not been mentioned and its says that there was no representation on the side of the petitioner / 2nd respondent in the appeal.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner /2nd respondent in the appeal, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner/2nd respondent in the appeal is not aggrieved by the judgment, dated 09.02.2023 passed in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017 and is aggrieved only by non mentioning the name of the counsel for the petitioner / 2nd respondent in the said judgment, dated 09.02.2023.

3. No prejudice would be caused to any of the parties, if the name of the

counsel for the petitioner / 2nd respondent in the appeal is disclosed in the judgment, dated 09.02.2023 passed in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017.

4. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of by directing the Registry to issue a copy of the judgment, dated 09.02.2023 passed in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017 by mentioning the name of Ms.R.Sree Vidhya as learned counsel for the 2nd respondent in the said judgment.

01.04.2024 vsi2 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vsi2

in C.M.A. No.1897 of 2017 01.04.2024