Tata Capital Ltd v. Karthik

THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.03.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Arb. Appln. Nos.641 and 642 of 2024 TATA Capital Ltd., By its Legal Manager, D. Kalaiarasan Applicant Vs Karthik Respondent For Applicant : Mr.N. K. Vanan - - - - - A report has been filed by the Advocate Commissioner in the respective applications. On perusal of the said reports, it is seen that the respondent has approached the applicant for arriving at an amicable settlement. Therefore, he seeks for a direction from this Court to grant extension of time for the Advocate Commissioner to execute the Warrant of Commission. Accordingly, time is extended for the Advocate Commissioner to execute the Warrant of Commission. If the equipment is not repossessed on or before the next hearing date, this application 1/3

shall stand automatically closed, by granting liberty to the applicant to file a fresh application as and when it is possible for the applicant to repossess the equipment and while doing so, this Court shall consider retaining the very same Advocate Commissioner, since initial remuneration was already paid.

2. It is made clear that whatever directions issued by this Court earlier to the concerned Police Officer shall continue to enable the Advocate Commissioner to repossess the equipment from the respondent or wherever it is available.

3. Post the matter on 02.04.2025.

4. Registry is directed to issue Warrant of Commission to the Advocate Commissioner in terms of this order. 05.03.2025 Note : Issue order copy on 06.03.2025 vsi2 2/3

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

vsi2 Arb. Appln. Nos.641 and 642 of 2024 05.03.2025 3/3