CRP No. 3739 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE CRP No. 3739 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 16230 OF 2026 K. Balasubramanian Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Citrex Products Ltd rep by its Director V. Rajendran 2.R. Padma 3.R. Ganesh Raj Rep by Power of Attorney Holder, V. Rajendran 4.Rajeswari Sathish 5.R. Sathish Raj 6.V. Rajendran 7.Usha Selvarathinam 8.P. Selvarathinam 9.M. Jeya 10.K. Mahalingaswamy 11.N. Ayyamperumal 12.Viswapriya Financial Services and Securities Ltd., rep by its Managing Director R. Subramanian 13.Custodial Services India (P) Ltd., rep by its Director V. Gopal, E-27, Anna Nagar East, Chennai 102. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 3739 of 2026 14.Long Short Investments P Ltd., rep by its Director V. Rengaswamy 15.Thamaraparani Investment Pvt Ltd., rep by its Director V. Gopal 16.Visram Financial Services P Ltd., rep by its Director P. Rammohan 17.R. Subramanian 18.M. Rathinakumar 19.S. Chandrasekar 20.Mangalam 21.R. Ganesh 22.P. Ramohan 23.V. Gopal 24.Sumathi Rathinakumar 25.Revathi Gopal 26.Subhiksha Trading Services Pvt Ltd., Rep by its Managing Director R. Subramanian 27.Bala Deshpandey 28.R. Hariharan Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the Order dated 09.06.2026 passed by the Ld. Additional Commercial Judge Egmore, Chennai in Com Suit NO.89 of 2026 on the file of the Ld. Additional Commercial Judge Egmore, Chennai. For Petitioner(s): Mr.Prakash Goklany For Mr.Y.G.Guna Sekar https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 3739 of 2026 ORDER This Civil Revision Petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order dated 09.06.2026 passed in a Memo filed by the counsel on record for the sixth defendant in Com Suit No.89 of 2026. 2.In view of the objection raised by the counsel for the plaintiffs opposing the appearance of Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian for D2 to D8, D12 to D15 and D18 without filing vakalat, Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian, learned counsels have not been allowed to represent the other defendants as an Advocate without filing vakalat through the impugned order. 3.Mr.Prakash Goklaney, learned counsel who is appearing for the petitioner/sixth defendant would submit that despite filing a memo, the Trial Court refused to permit him to argue the matter on behalf of the aforesaid defendants in the suit. 4.A counsel duly authorised by the counsel on record, who has filed the vakalat, can argue the matter. A memo has also been filed by the counsel on record authorising Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian to argue the matter on behalf of D2 to D8, D12 to D15 and D18 without filing vakalat. If https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 3739 of 2026 such a memo has been filed, there is no impediment for Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian to represent the aforesaid defendants. Therefore, this Civil Revision Petition is disposed of by permitting Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian to argue the suit and the Interlocutory Applications on behalf of D2 to D8, D12 to D15 and D18, provided a fresh memo has been filed by the counsel on record for those defendants permitting Mr.Prakash Goklaney and Mr.R.Subramanian to argue on behalf of the said defendants in Com Suit No.89 of 2026 and the Interlocutory Applications if any before the Additional Commercial Court, Egmore, Chennai. Consequently, connected CMP is closed. No costs. 13-07-2026 vga https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 3739 of 2026 To 1.The Additional Commercial Judge, Egmore, Chennai 2.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CRP No. 3739 of 2026 ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. vga CRP No. 3739 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 16230 OF 2026 13-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis