Allowed

S.Jaisankar v. the Presiding Officer

Madras HC7 Nov 2019WP/26604/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the High Court of Madras Tribunal and Registrar orders confirming a surcharge. Respondents submitted that the petitioner paid the liability with interest. The High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order affecting the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition was allowed, and the impugned order affecting the petitioner was set aside. No costs.

S.Jaisankar Vs the Presiding Officer — Cooperative Societies | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 07.11.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJA

¶5

Writ Petition No.26604 of 2013

¶6

S.Jaisankar ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs
1. The Presiding Officer,
Co-operative Tribunal/
Principal District Judge,
Krishnagiri.
2. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative
Societies, Krishnagiri Circle,
Krishnagiri.
3. The Management,
D.K.81 Chennachandiram Primary
Agricultural Co-op. Credit Society
Limited rep. by its President,
Avalapalli Post,
Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari,
calling for the records of the 1 st respondent judgment in CMA
(CS) No.30/2008 dated 20.11.2012 and confirming the order passed
by the 2 nd respondent in Surcharge No.7/2007/Sa.Pal dated
29.04.2008, quash the same.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Ashrafkhan For Respondents : Mr.M.S.Palanisamy, Standing Counsel for R3 Mr.R.Balaramesh, Spl.G.P. for R2 R1-Tribunal

¶9

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶10

1/4

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order of the 1^st respondent dated 20.11.2012 passed in CMA (CS) No.30/2008 thereby confirming the order passed by the 2^nd respondent in Surcharge No.7/2007/Sa.Pal dated 29.04.2008 and to quash the same.

¶13

When the matter was taken up, Mr.M.S.Palanisamy, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3^rd respondent, namely the Management, D.K.81 Chennachandiram Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Avalapalli Post, Krishnagiri District, placing on record a Memo dated 7.11.2019 filed by the 3^rd respondent stated that the petitioner has paid his surcharge liability with interest at Rs.6,19,710/- to the Society on 01.11.2018. Therefore, the Writ Petition may be allowed by setting aside the impugned order in respect of the petitioner alone.

¶14

In view of the Memo filed by the 3^rd respondent stating that the petitioner has paid his Surcharge Liability with interest at Rs.6,19,710/- to the Society on 01.11.2018, the Writ Petition stands allowed and the impugned order to the extent affecting the petitioner herein alone is set aside. No costs.

¶15

Sd/-
Deputy Registrar(CJ conf)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
tsi

¶16

¶17

The Presiding Officer, Co-operative Tribunal/ Principal District Judge, Krishnagiri.

¶18

The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Krishnagiri Circle, Krishnagiri.

¶19

2/4

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶21

+1cc to Mr.R.Ashrafkhan Advocate sr92634 +1cc to Mr.M.S.Palanisamy Advocate sr92635

W.P.No.26604 of 2013

aa05/02/2020

3/4

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Jaisankar v. the Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jaisankar v. the Presiding Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.v.Murali Vs the Superintending Engineer

P.N.Sridaran, Vs the Senior Engineer

Mrs.a.R.Yasmin, Vs the Chairman

G.v.Raghavan Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

V.Sundaram, Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and

A,Venkatachalapathy Vs The Sub Registar