The Madurai Bench dismissed this writ petition seeking directions to stop a vehicle seizure by a finance company. The court found the matter involved a financial dispute over a loan and held that the writ jurisdiction was not the appropriate remedy.
None; the petition for a writ of mandamus was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 15/6/2015
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
Writ Petition (MD) No.9560 of 2015
A.Alagar ... Petitioner
Vs
Home Department, Secretariat,
Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
Office of the Director General of Police,
Police Head Quarters, Beach Road, Chennai.
Office of the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
5.The Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North Police Station, Sivagangai District.
D2, 3rd Floor, AR Plaza, No.16 and 17, North Veli Street, Madurai – 1. ... Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to instruct the respondent No.6 not to seize the vehicle without following the due process of law and to take necessary action on the basis of the petitioner's representation dated 09.06.2015, within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Alagumani https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Respondents ... Mr.R.R.Anandharaj, GA (R1 to R5)
2
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent Nos.1 to 5, to instruct the respondent No.6, not to seize the vehicle, without following the due process of law and to take necessary action, on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 09.06.2015.
6th respondent, which is sought to be recovered from the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the 6th respondent is taking coercive steps to recover the amount of Rs.28,00,000/-, less the amount already paid. Since it is the issue concerning financial dispute, the writ petition is not a remedy for the petitioner to approach this Court. I find no merits in this writ petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
/True Copy/
Sub Assistant Registrar
To
+1cc Spl.Government Pleader Sr.No. 31226
mpk AA/06.07.2015/2p-8c/
Writ Petition (MD) No.9560 of 2015 15/6/2015
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ of mandamus is an appropriate remedy for a financial dispute regarding loan recovery and vehicle seizure.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
A.Alagar
The Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department
The Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Finance Department
The Director General of Police
The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District
The Inspector of Police, Karaikudi North Police Station
S.Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
