A NO. 2014 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR A NO. 2014 of 2025 in C.S.(Com.Div).103 of 2025 and A.No.2013 of 2025 --- M/s.Tachnat Pty Ltd Rep. By its Director Mr.Hulio Gash 90C Fairfield Rd Guildford West New South Wales 2165 Australia ..Applicant/Plaintiff Vs S and S Fashions Private Limited No.136, Arcot Road, 3rd Floor, Shyamla Towers, Saligramam, Chennai - 600 093. India. Represented by its Director Mr.Santhosh Prabu. ..Respondent/Defendant For Applicant(s): Ms.Hema Srinivasan ORDER The present application is filed seeking to furnish security for a sum of Rs.49,54,816/-. 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A NO. 2014 of 2025 2. The case of the applicant/plaintiff is that the applicant is the owner of the clothing brand “Hulio Gash” which is engaged in the business of selling Hulio Gash brand shirts in Australia and worldwide. The respondent/defendant is the manufacturing company who approached the applicant claiming that they are capable of manufacturing high quality cotton garments and expressed their interest. 3. Pursuant to the above approach by the respondent, the applicant/plaintiff states that the applicant, the applicant company has made the payments to the respondent/defendant to an extent of AUD 42,000 between 11.12.2013 and 07.08.2014. The 1st shipment was made, which was invoiced under number SS/EX/04/2014-15 dated 08.12.2014 and it was duly received by the applicant/plaintiff in the month of December 2014. Thereafter, the applicant/plaintiff received two more shipments from the respondent/defendant company in December 2017 valued at AUD 12,498, leaving a significant balance unpaid. Aside from these, towards three shipments totalling AUD 32,844, the respondent/defendant failed to supply any further goods or return the advance payment of AUD 86,156. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A NO. 2014 of 2025 4. On the basis of the claim made by the applicant/plaintiff, a notice dated 13.04.2024 was issued to the respondent/defendant and since the postal cover was returned with endorsement “Addressee cannot be located”, the applicant thereafter made repeated attempts to follow-up with the respondent/defendant through multiple emails and Whatsapp messages, on 18.10.2022, 23.09.2022, 30.01.2023, 13.07.2023, 05.01.2024, 13.01.2024, 05.03.2024 and 06.03.2024, but the respondent/defendant failed to deliver the remaining goods or return the additional advance amount of AUD 86,156. 5. This court permitted the applicant/plaintiff to serve the respondent/defendant through substituted service and the substituted service, by way of paper publication was effected. The publication in the Dinamalar edition was filed by the applicant before this court on 18.09.2025. 6. When the matter was listed before this court on 03.11.2025, there was no representation on the side of the respondent/defendant. Even today, 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A NO. 2014 of 2025 there is no representation for the respondent/defendant. Therefore, the prayer sought by the Applicant/plaintiff for furnishing security is ordered. 7. This court directs the respondent/defendant to furnish security for a sum of Rs.49,54,816/- towards the principal portion of the suit claim. 12-11-2025 nvsri 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis A NO. 2014 of 2025 N.SENTHILKUMAR, J. nvsri A NO. 2014 of 2025 in C.S.(Com.Div).103 of 2025 and A.No.2013 of 2025 12.11.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis