Madras High Court
OSA/150/2022 of Kanthimathi Bhaskar Vs M/s.Metal Impex on 14 October 2026
OSA No. 150 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GK.MUTHUKUMAAR
OSA No. 150 of 2022
CNR:{HCMA010790262022}
AND
CMP NO. 9214 OF 2022
Mrs.Kanthimathi Bhaskar
W/o. P.C. Bhaskar
..Appellant(s)
Vs
1. M/s.Metal Impex,
Represented by its partner Mr. Kamlesh Jain, Prince Apartment, 59, Ormes Road, 7th Floor, Kilpauk, Chennai - 600 010.
2. Sneh. M. Jain
S/o. Mukesh Kumar Jain
3. Mrs.Kalawati
W/o. Sohanlal
..Respondent(s)
Original Side Appeal filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Madras High Court Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order and decretal order dated 08.03.2022 in A.No. 2466 of 2020 in A.No.
6614 of 2019 in C.S..No. 492 of 2019.
For Appellant(s):
Mr.K.V.Babu
for Ms.K.R.B.Dhaaranee
OSA No. 150 of 2022
For Respondent(s):
Mrs.Chithra Sampath
Senior counsel
for Mr.Vikram U Jain
for R1 to R3
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Sathish Kumar J.) Challenging the order of the learned single Judge dated 08.03.2022 in A.No.2466 of 2020 dismissing the application to set aside the judgment and decree dated 28.02.2020 passed by the learned Master in A.No.6614 of 2019 in C.S.No.492 of 2020, the present appeal has been filed.
2. A.No.6614 of 2019 has been filed seeking leave to defend the suit as the suit was filed as a summary suit. The learned Master by order dated 17.12.2009 granted leave subject to the condition of furnishing security for a sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs only) on or before 24.01.2020. As the appellant could not furnish security in time, learned Master dismissed the application by order dated 28.02.2020. Challenging the dismissal order passed by the learned Master, A.No.2466 of 2020 has been filed before the learned single Judge. The learned single Judge, by order dated 08.03.2022, dismissed the said application on the ground that the applicant has not furnished the security as ordered by the learned Master. Challenging the same, the present appeal came to be filed.
OSA No. 150 of 2022
3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the suit has been filed by the respondents as a summary suit to recover the balance amount allegedly payable by the appellant to the respondents. According to the learned counsel, he has already filed a suit for rendition of accounts, redemption of mortgage and also challenging the sale under Section 69 of the Transfer of Property Act and the said suit is pending in C.S.No.536 of 2018. When that being so, after the sale of the property by the respondents, they filed a summary suit. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the valuation of the respondents itself clearly shows that the mortgaged property is worth about Rs.3 Crores, whereas the property has been sold only for Rs.1,40,00,000/-, which has already been challenged in the aforesaid suit and therefore, an opportunity must be given to him to defend the suit or otherwise his rights will be seriously prejudiced. The learned counsel also submits that now the appellant is ready to furnish security for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- within period of six weeks.
4. The learned Senior counsel for the respondents would submit that if proper security is furnished by the appellant, the respondents have no objection for allowing the appellant/defendant to defend the suit.
5. In view of the above submissions, now the point that arises for consideration in this appeal is, whether the order of the learned single Judge is liable to be interfered with.
OSA No. 150 of 2022
6. Admittedly, the respondents have filed the summary suit to recover the balance amount after the sale of the property mortgaged in their favour. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that although the value of the property is Rs.3 Crores, it was sold for a sum of Rs.1,40,00,000/-. Therefore, according to him, the very sale itself has been put to challenge in the afore-referred suit in C.S.No.536 of 2018 and at this stage, the summary suit has been filed and therefore, he should be given an opportunity to contest the case and both the suits are to be tried together.
7. Considering the nature of the lis, the fact that summary suit has been filed to recover the differential amount and also the fact that the sale of the property under Section 69 of Transfer of Property Act is also challenged in C.S.No.536 of 2018, we are of the view that both the suits msut be tried together by the same Court. Now the appellant is also willing to furnish security for a sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/-as directed by the learned Master.
8. In such view of the matter, this Original Side Appeal is disposed of directing the appellant to furnish security to the tune of Rs.1,50,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Fifty Lakhs only) within a period of six weeks from today. On such security being furnished, the appellant shall be permitted to file a written statement within one month thereafter. On filing of such written statement, the present suit in C.S.No.492 of 2019 and C.S.No.536 of 2018 shall
OSA No. 150 of 2022
be tried together in a joint trial. It is made clear that if the security is not furnished as agreed before this Court, this appeal will stand dismissed automatically. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (N.S.K.,J.) (G.K.M.,J.) 14-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No gpa
OSA No. 150 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR J. AND GK.MUTHUKUMAAR J. gpa OSA No. 150 of 2022 and CMP No. 9214 of 2022 14-10-2026