Tvs Credit Services Ltd. v. Gautambhai Bharvad And Another

Arb.Appln. No.246 of 2022 Arb.Appln. No.246 of 2022 Krishnan Ramasamy, J., Mr.M.Arunachalam, learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably, and hence, he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this application. An endorsement to that effect is also made in the application today. 2.

Intervening at this stage, Mr.Sidharth Bandari, the learned Advocate Commissioner submitted that, as per the direction of this Court, he has executed the warrant and found that the subject hypothecated vehicle is at Gujarat, as ill luck would have it, he could not seize the same, owing to non-cooperation of the first respondent. Hence, the learned Advocate Commissioner prayed that since to execute the warrant, he has gone to Gujarat, he may be paid with an additional remuneration of Rs.30,000/-.

3. Recording the endorsement made by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant, this Application is dismissed as withdrawn. However, taking into consideration of the fact that despite arduous efforts exerted by the Advocate Commissioner, vehicle was not able to be seized, though traced, this Court feels that the additional remuneration prayed by the Advocate Commissioner is just and proper. Hence, this Court, directs the applicant to pay a sum of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) as 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Arb.Appln. No.246 of 2022 Krishnan Ramasamy, J., sd additional remuneration to the Advocate Commissioner, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This application is dismissed as withdrawn, as already stated above. 19.06.2023 sd Arb.Appln. No.246 of 2022 2/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis