Venkatesan Vs The Management

Venkatesan vs The Management

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jun 24, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1490372

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1490372
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice S. M. Subramaniam,Honourable Mr.Justice R.Sakthivel
Decided On: Jun 24, 2026
Case Number: CMP/24846/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Venkatesan

Respondent

The Management

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 24-06-2026coramthe hon'ble mr justice s. m. subramaniam and the hon'ble mr.justice r.sakthivel in venkatesan ..petitioner vs the management, madurantakam co-operative sugar mills ltd., rep. by its managing director, padalam, kancheepuram district-603 308. ..respondent civil miscellaneous petition filed under section 151 of the code of civil procedure seeking to modify the order dated 18.09.2025 made in w.a.no.3158 of 2024 passed by this court in the terms of the settlement agreement that is signed by parties as well as the counsel. for petitioner : ms.m.shahin banu for mr.p.b.suresh babu for respondent : mr.haja nazirudeen, senior counsel for mr.p.haribabu *****order(made by s.m.subramaniam j.)the present miscellaneous petition seeking modification of the orderdated 18.09.2025 passed in w.a.no.3158 of 2024 has been filed mainly on the ground that the learned counsel on record appearing on behalf of the page1 of 2s.m.subramaniam, j.andr.sakthivel, j.gm petitioner herein had not signed the settlement, which was recorded by this court.2. a perusal of the document would show that the parties to thesettlement have signed and agreed the terms and conditions. thus, this court recorded the terms of settlement as agreed between the parties. further, the fact remains that the learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions regarding agreement of settlement before the court while passing the final order. that being the factum, the present modification petition is unnecessary. accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (s.m.s.,j.) (r.s.v.,j.) 24-06-2026 index: yesspeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no gm in page2 of 2

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL in Venkatesan ..Petitioner Vs The Management, Madurantakam Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Padalam, Kancheepuram District-603 308. ..Respondent Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to modify the order dated 18.09.2025 made in W.A.No.3158 of 2024 passed by this Court in the terms of the Settlement Agreement that is signed by parties as well as the counsel. For Petitioner : Ms.M.Shahin Banu for Mr.P.B.Suresh Babu For Respondent : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen, Senior Counsel for Mr.P.Haribabu *****

ORDER

(Made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

The present miscellaneous petition seeking modification of the order

dated 18.09.2025 passed in W.A.No.3158 of 2024 has been filed mainly on the ground that the learned counsel on record appearing on behalf of the Page1 of 2

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND

R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

gm petitioner herein had not signed the settlement, which was recorded by this Court.

2. A perusal of the document would show that the parties to the

settlement have signed and agreed the terms and conditions. Thus, this Court recorded the terms of settlement as agreed between the parties. Further, the fact remains that the learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions regarding agreement of settlement before the Court while passing the final order. That being the factum, the present modification petition is unnecessary. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (S.M.S.,J.) (R.S.V.,J.) 24-06-2026 Index: Yes

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No gm in Page2 of 2

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Venkatesan vs The Management Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice S. M. Subramaniam,Honourable Mr.Justice...