Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, v. M/S.Hanslot Pile Foundations,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU and Appeal (CAD) SR No.170514 of 2025

1. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Represented by its Chairman, Having its Office at NPKRR Maaligai,No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2. The Superintending Engineer, Civil Thermal -I North, Chennai, Thermal Power Station, Having its office at NPKRR Maaligai, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai -600 002.

3. The Superintending Engineer (Civil Project), North- Chennai, Thermal Power Station, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai -600 120.

4. The Chief Engineer (Civil Projects) North- Chennai, Thermal Power Station, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Chennai -600 120.

5. The Chief Engineer, (Civil -Designs) Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Having his office at NPKRR Maaligai, No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai -600 002.

..Appellant(s) Vs M/s.Hanslot Pile foundations, A Registered Partnership firm, Represented by its Managing Partner D.Thukkaram, Having his office at No.1, Bishop Wallers Avenue (West), Mylapore, Chennai -600 004.

..Respondent(s) This petition filed seeking to condone the delay of 18 days in filing the above Appeal (CAD) S.R.No.170514 of 2025. For Appellant(s):

Ms. J.Hemalatha Gajapathy For Respondent(s):

Mr.M.S.Subramanian N.K.Sivakumar for Sole Respondent

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by C.V.Karthikeyan J.) This petition has been filed seeking to condone the delay of 18 days in filing the appeal, challenging the judgment in COS No.1133 of 2022 dated 17.04.2025 passed by the Principal Commercial Court, Egmore.

2.Notice had been directed and the learned counsel had also entered appearance on behalf of the respondent.

3.In the affidavit filed in support of the petition, it had been stated that the judgment was passed on 17.04.2025 and copy application was filed on 21.04.2025 and copies were made ready on 10.07.2025, which was received on 16.07.2025. Thereafter, there was a mistake in the decree and the same had to be amended and the amendment was carried out on 08.08.2025. The documents had also to be examined before filing of the appeal. 4.The learned counsel for the respondent stated that he would have to get instructions.

5.Since the learned counsel had entered appearance and the delay is only minimal and the reasons are also acceptable, we would condone the delay and grant every opportunity to the respondent to advance arguments after the appeal is numbered. Accordingly, this petition stands allowed. 6.The Registry is directed to number the appeal, if it is otherwise in order. 7.The Registry may also print the names of Mr.M.S.Subramanian and Mr.N.K.Sivakumar, as counsel for the respondent, in the cause list, when the petition seeking stay is brought up before this Court. (C.V.K.,J.) (K.B.,J.) 30-01-2026 smv

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

AND K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

SMV 30-01-2026