Disposed

G.Thilagarani v. the Secretary

Madras HC10 Apr 2024WP/264/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ under Article 226 directing the Authorised Officer of Bank of India to consider One Time Settlement representations. The Court transmitted the deposited security to the Debt Recovery Tribunal and continued interim protection for fifteen days before disposing of the writ.

What did the court decide?

The amount of Rs. 16,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner was transmitted to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore. The writ petition was disposed of with a consequent closure of the connected misce

G.Thilagarani Vs the Secretary — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

WP No.264 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 10.04.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶6

AND

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

¶8

WP No.264 of 2024 and WMP No.325 of 2024

G.Thilagarani

.. Petitioner

-vs-

The Secretary, Government of Tamil nadu, Agricultural Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶13

The Authorised Officer, M/s.Bank of India, Recovery Department, Coimbatore Zonal Office, Star House, No.324, Oppanakara Street,

¶14

Coimbatore 641 001.

¶15

The District Collector, Nilgiris.

¶16

State Level Bankers' Committee, Convenor, Indian Overseas Bank, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶17

.. Respondents

¶18

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd Respondent herein to consider and pass orders on the representations of the petitioner seeking One Time Settlement dated 18.04.2022, 6.9.2023 and 30.10.2023 within a time frame.

¶19

Page 1 of 5

¶20

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

¶21

WP No.264 of 2024

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.Srinath Sridevan Senior Counsel for Mr.P.M.N.Bhagavath Krishnan For Respondents : Mr.K.Karthik Jegannath Government Advocate for RR 1 and 3 : Mr.F.B.Benjamin George for R-2 : Not ready in notice reg. R-4 * * * * * ORDER

¶23

(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶24

We have heard Mr.Srinath Sridevan, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr.K.Karthik Jegannath, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 3 and Mr.F.B.Benjamin George, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶25

The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a Securitisation Application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore, challenging the sale notice. The present writ petition is also filed before this Court seeking direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider One Time Settlement.

¶26

Page 2 of 5

¶27

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

¶28

WP No.264 of 2024

¶29

We had, by an interim order, permitted the sale to proceed, however, passed an order not to finalise the same on condition that the petitioner deposits an amount of Rs.16,00,000/- (Rupees sixteen lakhs only). The petitioner has complied with the order and deposited Rs.16,00,000/-. It is the further submission that the petitioner has also deposited an amount of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) after the issuance of the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002.

¶30

The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner would prosecute the Securitisation Application before the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶31

In light of that, the amount of Rs.16,00,000/- deposited by the petitioner is transmitted to the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore.

¶32

The interim protection granted by this Court shall continue for a period of fifteen days from today so as to enable the petitioner to

¶33

Page 3 of 5

¶34

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

¶35

WP No.264 of 2024

¶36

seek appropriate relief before the Debts Recovery Tribunal. Needless to state that on lapse of fifteen days, the interim protection granted by this Court shall come to an end and the parties would be governed by the orders passed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal.

¶37

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

(S.V.G., CJ.) (J.S.N.P., J.) 10.04.2024 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶39

sra

¶40

¶41

The Secretary, Government of Tamil nadu, Agricultural Department, Secretariat, Chennai.

¶42

The Authorised Officer, M/s.Bank of India, Recovery Department, Coimbatore Zonal Office, Star House, No.324, Oppanakara Street, Coimbatore 641 001.

¶43

The District Collector, Nilgiris.

¶44

State Level Bankers Committee, Convenor, Indian Overseas Bank, 763, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶45

Page 4 of 5

¶46

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

¶47

WP No.264 of 2024

¶48

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.

(sra)

WP No.264 of 2024

10.04.2024

Page 5 of 5

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

G.Thilagarani v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Thilagarani v. the Secretary

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

Ramesh.K Vs the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives

Tamilnadu Chit Fund Companies Vs Union of India,Ministry of

Sanchar Nigam Executive Vs Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

M/S Vee Ess Enterprises Vs the Director General of

V.P.M.Muthaiah Pillai, Vs the Tamil Nadu State Govt

M/S.Dhruv International Vs the Director General of