Dismissed

R.Mangaiyarkarasi v. The Deputy Registrar

Madras HC25 Jun 2024WP/25320/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, set ex-parte in a chit funds award, sought writ mandamus to make the Deputy Registrar-Chits dispose of their petition to set aside that award. The court found no provision exists to set aside an ex-parte award under the Chit Funds Act and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal with liberty to file appeal against the award under Section 70 of the Chit Funds Act; no costs.

R.Mangaiyarkarasi Vs The Deputy Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 25.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶7

1.R.Mangaiyarkarasi 2.R.Sambandam 3.R.Narendiren 4.R.Tamilarasi ...Petitioners Vs. 1.The Deputy Registrar – Chits, Nagapattinam 604 001 2.M/s.Shriram Chits Tamilnadu(P) Ltd., Rep. By its Foreman, No.23, Nethaji Road, Thiruvarur ... Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India p raying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent herein to dispose of the petitioners petition to set aside the ex-parte award dated 25.02.2010 made in AROP.No.150 of 2010.

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Dhanasekaran For Respondents For R2 : Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen For R1 : Mr.S.Arumugam, Government Advocate

¶10

1/4

¶11

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

¶12

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶13

ORDER

¶14

This writ petition has been filed for direction to the first

¶15

respondent to dispose of the petitioners' petition to set aside the exparte award passed in AROP.No.150 of 2010 on the file of the first respondent

¶16

dated 25.02.2010.

¶17

It is seen that as against the petitioners, award was passed on the application submitted by the second respondent in AROP.No.150 of 2010 on the file of the first respondent. However, the grievance of the petitioners is that the petitioners were not served with any notice and they were not heard and as such, they were set exparte. Therefore, the petitioners filed application to set aside the exparte award passed in AROP.No.150 of 2010 dated 25.02.2010. However, there is no provision to set aside the exparte award passed under the Chit Funds Act. But, there is appeal provision to file appeal as against the award passed by the first respondent before the State Government under Section 70 of the Chit Funds Act.

¶18

2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶20

Therefore, the petition filed before the first respondent to set

¶21

aside the exparte award is not maintainable and the direction sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted. As such, this writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.

¶22

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioners are at liberty to file appeal as against the award passed in AROP.No.150 of 2010 on the file of the first respondent dated 25.02.2010, in the manner known to law, if so advised. There shall be no

¶23

order as to costs.

¶24

25.06.2024

¶25

Neutral citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order lok

¶26

3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶28

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶29

lok

¶30

¶31

1.The Deputy Registrar – Chits, Nagapattinam 604 001

¶32

2.Foreman, M/s.Shriram Chits Tamilnadu(P) Ltd., No.23, Nethaji Road, Thiruvarur

¶33

W.P.No.25320 of 2021

¶34

25.06.2024

¶35

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

R.Mangaiyarkarasi v. The Deputy Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Mangaiyarkarasi v. The Deputy Registrar

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

B.Revathy Vs The District Collector

K.Manickam Vs the Managing Director

Saravana Associates Builders Vs The Secretary to the

M/s.Omkara Asset Reconstruction Vs The District Collector

D.Gunasekaran Vs The Commissioner of Sugar and Cane

V.Dillibabu Vs The Regional Passport officer