Madras High Court
CRP/4090/2026 of Abu Ventures Vs Edge Enterprises on 10 September 2026
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
and
CMP NO. 17858 of 2026
Abu Ventures
Rep by its Partner,
Balu Palani,
Sub-Franchise of the Brand,
Slam Life Style and Fitness Studion
No.24, F1/F2, Rajiv Gandhi Salai,
(opposite to Apollo Hospitals) Perungudi Chennai 600 096
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. Edge Enterprises
Rep by its proprietor,
S.Lakshmicharan,
s/o Rajagopalan Sivakumar,
Having principal office at
Old No.40/3, New No.81,
T Nagar, Chennai 600 017
having additional office at
Dr.Ambedkar Road,
Kodambakkam,
Chennai 600 024
2. Ashirvad Agency
rep by it Proprietor,
Leena Sanal,
w/o Sanal Govind
Perungudi, Chennai 600 096
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
3. Slam Life Style and Fitness Studio
(opposite to Apollo Hospitals)
No.24, F1/F2, Rajiv Gandhi Salai,
Perungudi, Chennai 600 096
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the constitution of India, to set aside the order dated 20.02.2026 made in EA.SR.No.21 of 2026 in EP.No.26 of 2025 on the file of the learned Sub ordinate Judge at Alandur.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.K.Vijayaragavan
For Respondent(s):
M/s.David Tyagaraj for R1
No appearance for R2 and 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.
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 20.02.2026 made in EA.SR.No.21 of 2026 in EP.No.26 of 2025 on the file of the learned Sub ordinate Judge at Alandur.
2. I have heard Mr.K.Vijayaragavan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.David Thyagaraj, learned counsel for the 1st respondent.
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that his application under Order XXI Rule 58 of CPC has been dismissed at the threshold, even without numbering. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has substantial valuable rights and interest over the property, which is subject matter of the attachment made by the Court in execution of decree in O.S.No.2919 of 2019. Order XXI Rule 58 CPC specifically provides for an avenue for innocent third parties, whose interest is involved in the property attached to put for their objection. Necessarily, the Court will have to test the objections objectively and in line with the mode of enquiry contemplated under Order XXI of CPC. In view of the above, the Court ought not to have dismissed the application at the SR stage, without even hearing the counsel for the petitioner.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent would fairly state that the petition may be directed to be numbered and sufficient opportunity may be given to the petitioner to contest the claim petition on merits. In the light of the above, I am inclined to set aside the order dated 20.02.2026 made in EA.SR No.21 of 2026 on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Alandur.
5. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed and the order dated dated 20.02.2026 made in EA.SR No.21 of 2026 on the file of the learned
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
Subordinate Judge, Alandur, is set aside. The Subordinate Court, Alandur, shall number the Order XXI Rule 58 CPC application filed by the revision petitioner and shall provide two weeks time to the 1st respondent/decree holder to file a counter and thereafter, shall conduct due enquiry and dispose of the said application, within a period of six weeks thereafter. No costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 10-09-2026 ATA/AJ To The Subordinate Judge, Alandur
CRP No. 4090 of 2026
P.B.BALAJI J. ATA CRP No. 4090 of 2026 and CMP NO. 17858 OF 2026 10-09-2026