Tata Capital Ltd v. Amma Builders

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Arb.Appln. No.866 of 2024 M/s.Tata Capital Limited, rep. by its Authorised Signatory Kalai Arasan D .. Applicant vs M/s.Amma Builders .. Respondent

ORDER

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the respondent has been duly served with the notice in this application. An affidavit of service enclosing the delivery report has also been filed. However, no one has entered appearance on behalf of the respondent.

2.The Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court has already re-possessed the equipment, morefully described in the schedule to the judges summons. Since the respondent has chosen not to enter appearance in this application despite service of notice, the respondent is set exparte by this Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/2

ABDUL QUDDHOSE,J.

vga 3.Since the Advocate Commissioner has already re-possessed the equipment, nothing survives for further adjudication in this application. After recording the fact that the equipment has already been re-possessed by the Advocate Commissioner, this application is closed. 17.03.2025 vga Arb.Appln. No.866 of 2024 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/2