Dismissed

S.Srinivasan v. the State Represented by

Madras HC11 Dec 2024WP/38190/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A defaulting borrower whose loan was NPA for about 14 years sought a mandamus for police action and restoration of possession of his mortgaged office premises, which had been auctioned by the bank and resold. The court found the petition dishonest, noting nonpayment despite a reduced deposit, and dismissed it with costs.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/-: Rs.25,000/- to respondent No.4 by cheque to her advocate on record and Rs.25,000/- to the Tamil Nadu Advocate's Clerk's Association, within four weeks.

S.Srinivasan Vs the State Represented by — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 11.12.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.K.R.SHRIRAM, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

S.Srinivasan

.. Petitioner

1.The State,

rep. by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Law and Order,

¶13

Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.

¶14

2.The State,

¶15

rep. by the Inspector of Police, Manimangalam Police Station, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.

¶16

3.G.Velpandian 4.R.Anitha Ramamoorthy

¶17

5.The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank, Saidapet Branch, Chennai. .. Respondents

¶18

Page 1 of 6

¶19

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

¶20

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶21

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondents 1 to 2 to take action against respondent Nos.3 and 4 and to direct the Inspector of Police, Manimangalam Police Station to break open the lock put illegally in petitioner's office premises at Old No.1/179, New No.202, Union Road, Salamangalam, Padappai-601 301 and thereby hand over the possession of the above said property to petitioner after thorough investigation.

¶22

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Rajaram

¶23

For Respondents : Mr.A.Edwin Prabakar State Government Pleader assisted by Mr.Karthik Jegannath Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2

¶24

: Mr.T.Thiyagarajan for respondent No.4

¶25

ORDER

¶26

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶27

Petitioner, admittedly, is a borrower. Petitioner's loan account was

¶28

declared NPA, almost 14 years ago. The auction was stayed by the Debts Recovery Tribunal subject to the condition of deposit of Rs.36,54,797/-.

¶29

Page 2 of 6

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶32

Admittedly, petitioner found it difficult to mobilise the funds and, therefore, approached this Court for reduction of the amount. By an order dated 27^th April, 2012 in W.P.No.12597 of 2012, this Court reduced the deposit amount to Rs.25.00 lakhs, which, petitioner says, he has paid. Thereafter, not a penny has been paid. Counsel states he approached the bank for One-Time Settlement. When he approached or when did he write to the bank, nothing is mentioned in the affidavit. In view of the nonpayment, the bank has already sold the mortgaged premises to respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 has subsequently even sold the property to respondent No.4.

¶33

If petitioner was really serious, he would have paid off the debt almost 10 years ago. This is nothing but a dishonest approach by petitioner to thwart all legal proceedings and escape discharging his liability to the bank.

¶34

Petition is dismissed with costs in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only). Rs.25,000/- of that shall be paid to respondent No.4

¶35

___________ Page 3 of 6_

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶38

by way of a cheque drawn in favour of advocate on record for respondent

¶39

No.4. The balance Rs.25,000/- shall be paid to the following account of the Tamil Nadu Advocate's Clerk's Association, High Court Buildings, High

¶40

Court, Chennai-600 104:

¶41

Account No. : 484026006 Branch : Indian Bank, High Court Branch IFSC No. : IDIB000M157

¶42

These amounts shall be paid within four weeks from today.

¶43

(K.R.SHRIRAM, C.J.) (SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.) 11.12.2024

¶44

Index : Yes/No NC : Yes/No bbr

¶45

To:

¶46

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Police Law and Order,

¶47

Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.

¶48

2.The Inspector of Police, Manimangalam Police Station, Tambaram, Chennai-600 045.

¶49

3.The Authorised Officer, Indian Bank, Saidapet Branch, Chennai.

¶50

Page 4 of 6

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶53

___________ Page 5 of 6_

¶54

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

¶55

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

¶56

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J.

bbr

W.P.No.38190 of 2024

11.12.2024

___________ Page 6 of 6_

¶61

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

S.Srinivasan v. the State Represented by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Srinivasan v. the State Represented by

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

State Bank of India Vs Mr. Mathivaanan

Shivsu Canada Pure Fillers Private Limited Vs Shaik Dawood Traders

Mr.Hemant Nanda Vs M/S. Mercedes-Benz Services India Pvt. Ltd.

Abirami Vs the Branch Manager

Sriharan Sripathmanathan Vs Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd.

P.Naveen Chakravarthy Vs Punjab National Bank