Dismissed

Jayanthi Mala v. The District Collector

Madras HC1 Feb 2023WP(MD)/1960/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, guarantor for the fourth respondent, filed a writ petition challenging the bank's notice under SARFAESI Act. Court held petition not maintainable as similar earlier petition was withdrawn and the property had already been auctioned with a sale certificate issued to a third party.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing proceedings under K.Dis.G5/14320/2019 was dismissed.

Jayanthi Mala Vs The District Collector — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 01.02.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023 and

¶7

W.M.P(MD)Nos.1730 & 1732 of 2023

¶8

Jayanthi Mala ... Petitioner

¶9

vs.

¶10

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Trichy, Trichy District.

¶11

2.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office (East), Trichy, Trichy District.

¶12

3.The Authorized Officer, Indian Overseas Bank, Abhisekapuram Branch, Kallukuzhi Main Road, Mannarpuram, Trichy District – 620 020.

¶13

4.M/s.Shree Venkateswara Engineering Works, Represented by its Proprietor Mr.T.V.Sahnmugasundaram, D-28, Developed Plots, SIDCO Estate, Thuvakkudi, Trichy District.

¶14

1/6

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

5.Mukesh Kumar

6.D.Suresh Kumar

... Respondents

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the first respondent vide proceeding in K.Dis.G5/14320/2019 dated 28.11.2022, quash the same.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sakthivel For RR 1 & 2 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate

¶22

For R - 3 : Mr.R.Pandivel

¶23

ORDER

¶24

(Order of the Court was made by D. KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)

¶25

Challenging the proceedings issued by the first respondent in K.Dis.G5/14320/2019, dated 28.11.2022, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

¶26

2/6

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶29

According to the petitioner, she is the guarantor of the loan availed by the fourth respondent. Since the fourth respondent was not in a position to repay the loan amount, a notice was issued under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act by the third respondent. Though the petitioner undertakes to settle the outstanding amount to the third respondent, she raised several grounds in the Writ Petition. Earlier, the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.28895 of 2022, challenging the very same impugned order in the present Writ Petition dated 28.11.2022, and the same was dismissed as withdrawn.

¶30

The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent Bank submitted that the Writ Petition filed by the petitioner itself is not maintainable and the said property was sold in the auction and the fifth respondent has purchased the property and a sale certificate has also been issued.

¶31

4.Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, earlier the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.28895 of 2022 challenging the very same impugned order and the same was dismissed as withdrawn without liberty and she has filed the present Writ Petition, which

¶32

3/6

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶35

is not maintainable. Apart from that, the property in question has been sold to the fifth respondent and a sale certificate has also been issued in favour of the fifth respondent. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum in the manner known to law, if she is so advised. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

¶36

[D.K.K.,J.] [R.V.,J.] 01.02.2023

¶37

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps

¶38

4/6

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶41

¶42

1.The District Collector, District Collector Office, Trichy, Trichy District.

¶43

2.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office (East), Trichy, Trichy District.

¶44

3.The Authorized Officer, Indian Overseas Bank, Abhisekapuram Branch, Kallukuzhi Main Road, Mannarpuram, Trichy District – 620 020.

¶45

4.M/s.Shree Venkateswara Engineering Works, Represented by its Proprietor Mr.T.v.Sahnmugasundaram, D-28, Developed Plots, SIDCO Estate, Thuvakkudi, Trichy District.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

5/6

¶48

W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶49

D. KRISHNAKUMAR,J. and R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

¶50

¶51

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.1960 of 2023

¶52

DATED : 01.02.2023

¶53

6/6

¶54

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Jayanthi Mala v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayanthi Mala v. The District Collector

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

Muthuselvi Vs the Chief Judicial Magistrate

Kumaresan .N Vs The District Collector

Sathya Jaya Singh Vs The Chief Manager

Rajkumar a Vs The District Collector

Pugalenthi G Vs M/s. Axis Bank Ltd.

Premkumar.P Vs The Chief Manager