T. Janamma Alias Janakamma (Died), T. Ramana Reddy (Died) 1. T. Ramalakshmamma v. Mythri Finance Private Limited

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-02-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL T. Janamma Alias Janakamma (died), Ramana Reddy (died)

1. T. Ramalakshmamma W/o. Late Bheem Reddy, Rep by her GPA Holder K. Geetha C/o. Plot No.100, Vinayaka Residency, Agriculture Colony, Hastinapuram, Hyderabad, rep. by her GPA Holder K. Geetha W/o. Thirupathy Reddy, R/o. 87/1108-R-P-N, Rampirya Nagar, Kurnool Andhra Pradesh - 518002.

[ Cause title accepted vide Court order dated 17.12.2024 made in CMP.NO.28688 of 2024 in Arb. Appeal SR No. 149735 of 2024]

2. K.Annapurna Devi W/o. T.Ramana Reddy, R/o 87/1108-R-P-N, Rampriya Nagar, Kurnool Andhra Pradesh-518002, Being mentally disabled person Rep. by Her Mother, K.Geetha W/o Thirupathy Reddy, R/o 87/1108-R-P-N, Rampriya Nagar, Kurnool Andhra Pradesh 518002.

[ K. Geetha Recognized as General power of attorney to Appellants/Petitioners vide Court order dated 22.01.2025 made in CMP. No.306 of 2025 in Arb. Appeal SR No.149735 of 2024] ..Petitioners

Vs Mythri Finance Private Limited Re. by its Managing Director, Kakanooru Narendranath Reddy, S/o. Late K. Venkata Rami Reddy, D.No. 49-49/M, Maddur Nagar, Kurnool 518 002.

..Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1963, pleased to Condone the delay of 204 days in filing the application to set aside the order dt. 16.06.2023 made in I.A.No. 005/2023 in Arbitration No. 008/2020 on the file of the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of Sole Arbitrator, SRI.A.MAHESWAR REDDY, Chennai.

For Petitioners :

Mr. S. Ramachandran For Respondent :

Notice served - No Appearance

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 204 days in filing the application to set aside the order dated 16.06.2023 made in I.A.No. 005 of 2023 in Arbitration No.008 of 2020 on the file of the Arbitral Tribunal consisting of the Sole Arbitrator, SRI. A. MAHESWAR REDDY, Chennai. 2.

Though the name of the sole respondent was printed in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent. Hence, this Court heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the records.

3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, and in order to give a fair chance to the petitioners/appellants, this Court is inclined to allow this petition.

4.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

10-02-2026 klt Note: Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order, and list the matter in the usual course.

P.DHANABAL, J.

klt 10-02-2026