Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Sounthar, P.B. Balaji, JJ
D.Samuel Surendran – Appellant
Versus
Peranandha Perumal – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks dispensation of certified copy of nclt order. (Para 1) |
| 2. order passed based on consent of counsel for petitioner. (Para 2) |
| 3. claim of no consent and advice to seek modification from nclt. (Para 3) |
| 4. revision not entertained; liberty granted to seek modification from nclt. (Para 4) |
(Order of the Court was made by S.Sounthar J.)
C.M.P No. 10010 of 2026 is filed, seeking to dispense with the production of the certified copy of the order dated 23.02.2026 passed in I.A. (IBC)/1056(CHE)/2025 in CP/568/(IB)/(CB)/2017 on the file of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Chennai Bench-II.
2. It is seen from the impugned order that the same has been passed, based on the consent given by the counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the counsel for the petitioner never gave any kind of consent for passing the impugned order. If it is the case of the petitioner that the counsel for the petitioner has not given any consent, on instructions of the petitioner, it is for the petitioner to approach the very same forum, seeking for modification of the impugned order. The petitioner is not entitled to say before th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
