Jenil Alwin v. K.Manikandan
Case at a glance
- Bench
- N SENTHILKUMAR
Outcome
Disposed of
In view of the submissions made and considering the statutory remedy available under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the revision petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate appellate Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In view of the submissions made and considering the statutory remedy available under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the revision petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate appellate Court within…
Judgment
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17.02.2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMARCRP(MD). No.3828 of 2025 andCMP(MD).No.20161 of 2025 Jenil Alwin ... PetitionerVsK.Manikandan ... RespondentPRAYER :- Civil Revision Petition filed under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure Code, to set aside the order dated 09-10-2025 made in I.A.No.05 of 2025 in C.O.S.No.01 of 2024 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District and allow this civil revision Petition and thus render justice. For Petitioner : Mr. Sailendrababu.G, For Respondent : Mr.A.BalakrishnanORDERThis Civil Revision Petition has been filed to set aside the order dated 09.10.2025 passed in I.A. No. 05 of 2025 in C.O.S. No. 01 of 2024 on the file https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of the Principal Sub Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that there is a delay of 205 days in filing the petition to set aside the ex parte order passed against the petitioner.
The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that, as against the order passed by the trial Court, only an appeal would lie in view of Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. He further submitted that under Section 8 of the said Act, there is no bar in respect of an appeal against the interim order, and therefore this revision petition is not maintainable.
Operative part
In view of the submissions made and considering the statutory remedy available under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the revision petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate appellate Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 17.02.2026Index : Yes / NoInternet: Yes / Notrp https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Note: Registry is directed to return the original papers if any after substituting the xerox copy of the same. ToPrincipal Sub Court, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.TrpCRP(MD). No.3828 of 2025 andCMP(MD).No.20161 of 202517.02.2026
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view of the submissions made and considering the statutory remedy available under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of, granting liberty to the revision petitioner to file an appeal before the appropriate appellate Court within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 115; Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — s. 13.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.