SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74889

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr.Justice N. ANAND VENKATESH
Gail lndia Limited – Appellant
Versus
M/s.Silkroad Sugar Private Limited – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 19-12-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

A No. 5251 of 2024

AND

EP SR NO. 106231 OF 2024

Gail India Limited

GAIL Bhavan, 16, Bhikaji Cama Place

R.K.Puram, Ring road, New Delhi 110066

Applicant(s)

Vs

1. M/s.Silkroad Sugar Private Limited

Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India

Private Limited,

Represented by its Director,

Dare House, 234, N.S.C. Bose Road,

Chennai 600001

2.Lalitha Balakrishnan

Director of M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd.,

Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India

Private Limited,

Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234,

N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001

3.Suresh Kannan

Whole time Director of

M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd., Now known as

Parry Sugars Refinery India Private Limited,

Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234,

N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001

4.Murugappan Muthiah Venkatachalam

Director of M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd.,

Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India

Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001

5.Padmanabhan Nagarajan Director of M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd., Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001

6.Srinivasan Suresh Managing Director of M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd., Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001

7.Sridhar Adepalli Director of M/s Silk Road Sugar Private Ltd., Now known as Parry Sugars Refinery India Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Dare House, 234, N.S.C. Bose Road, Chennai 600001 Respondent(s)

A No. 5251 of 2024 PRAYER to direct the Judgement Debtor to disclose on an Affidavit of one of its directions Whole Time or Executive Directors, the full particulars of all the assets owned by the Judgement Debtor 2. all the Bank Account Numbers and Bank Branch Address of the Judgement Debtor 3 all of its Debtors with full name, address, value of debt of the said debtors, in the interest of justice and enquiry EP SR No. 106231 of 2024 PRAYER to issue attachment and sale of the movable properties of the judgment debtor from the above mentioned address under Order XXI Rule 43 and 64 CPC For Applicant(s): Ms.Pooja Jain Junior Panel Counsel For Respondent(s): Mr.Rahul Balaji

ORDER

This application has been filed for a direction to the respondent/judgment debtor to file an affidavit disclosing the assets.

2.When the application came up for hearing on 04.12.2025, this Court passed the following order:

“Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of applicant/decree holder submitted that the proceedings before the Delhi High Court is being protracted by the respondent/judgment debtor and therefore, he is pressing this application and requested this Court to direct the respondent/judgment debtor to file an affidavit by disclosing their assets.

2.Per contra, learned counsel for respondent/judgment debtor submitted that the award has been put to challenge before the Delhi High Court in O.M.P.(Comm) No.390/2017. Learned counsel further submitted that there was an understanding between the parties that the respondent/judgment debtor will not press the said petition and that the main petition itself will be taken up for final hearing. Recording the same, an order was passed by the Delhi High Court on 21.04.2025. The matter was again listed for hearing on 30.07.2025 on which date, the Court issued directions to both parties to keep a hard copy of the records ready to be presented at the time of hearing. Again, the matter was adjourned to 10.11.2025. When the petition was taken up for hearing on 10.11.2025, adjournment was sought for on behalf of the applicant/decree holder herein and hence, the matter has been adjourned to 23.03.2026. In view of the same, it was contended that the applicant/decree holder cannot be permitted to parallely move the execution petition when there is already an understandin

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top