Bank sought review of a writ appeal order upholding recovery from a member of a co-operative society, contending maintainability of the writ petition was wrongly rejected. The court held the point was not urged earlier and reagitation was no ground for review; review 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.
Review.Aplc (MD)No.37 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 07.03.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
Review Aplc(MD).No.37 of 2023
The President, Tamil Nadu Circle Postal, Co-operative Bank Ltd., No.1031, No.18/19, Jahangir Street,2nd Line Beach, Post Box No.5026, Chennai - 600001.
...Petitioner
Vs.
M.Chinnasekkan ...Respondent
Prayer: Review Petition filed under Order 47 Rule 1 r/w. Sec.114 of C.P.C., seeking to review the order dated 11.04.2023 made in W.A.(MD).No.402 of 2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Malaichamy
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)
The only grievance of the review applicant is that his plea regarding maintainability of the Writ Petition has been rejected on the ground that it has not been raised by the writ court.
1/4
Review.Aplc (MD)No.37 of 2023
2.Mr.R.Malaichamy, learned counsel appearing for the review applicant would invite our attention to the reference made in para 3 of the order of the learned single Judge where in the counter to the Writ Petition, it is stated that the Writ Petition is not maintainable. That portion of the order is only an extract from the counter affidavit and there is no further discussion on the question of maintainability which leads to the irresistible conclusion that the said point was not urged before the learned single Judge,
3.Furthermore, we have also stated that since the dispute is between the Member and Management of the Co-operative Society and it has been found that the management has appropriated the money belonging to him without due process of law, the impugned order of recovery is not sustainable.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the review applicant would reagitate the same ground before us to the effect that the writ petition is not maintainable. We do not think, it is a ground for review, since it does not amount to an error on the face of record. Hence, this Review Application is
2/4
Review.Aplc (MD)No.37 of 2023
dismissed. It is made clear that the order in W.A.No.(MD).No.402 of 2023 will not operate as a precedent.
(R.S.M., J.) (L.V.G., J.) 07.03.2024
kkn
Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Nuetral Citation :Yes/No
3/4
Review.Aplc (MD)No.37 of 2023 R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
KKN
Review Aplc.(MD)No.37 of 2023
07.03.2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Does rejection of the maintainability plea, not urged before the writ court, amount to an error on the face of the record warranting review?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
The President, Tamil Nadu Circle Postal, Co-operative Bank Ltd.
M.Chinnasekkan
R.Subramanian
L.Victoria Gowri
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
