Disposed

Dinesh Babu. K v. The Branch Manager

Madras HC21 Aug 2024WP(MD)/2160/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a Single Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash an order passed under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act. The High Court found that a conditional order issued earlier was complied with, the account was reclassified as standard, and no respondents appeared. Consequently, the petition was disposed of as infructuous.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of as having become infructuous; no costs awarded; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

Dinesh Babu. K Vs The Branch Manager — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.08.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023 and WMP(MD)Nos.1918 and 1919 of 2023

K.Dinesh Babu

... Appellant

vs.

The Branch Manager, Fullerton India Home Finance Company Ltd., Office at 2^nd Floor, No.163, Kamarajar Salai, Parameshwar Complex, Madurai-625 009.

¶11

The Authorized Officer, Fullerton India Home Finance Company Ltd., Office at 2^nd Floor, No.163, Kamarajar Salai, Parameshwar Complex, Madurai-625 009. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, in Cr.M.P.No.1791 of 2022 dated 30.11.2022 and

¶13

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

¶14

Page No.1 of 4

¶15

W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023

¶16

subsequent advocate commissioner notice dated 27.01.2023 and quash the same.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Venkatesan For Respondents : No appearance

¶18

ORDER

¶19

( Order of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

¶20

Challenge is to the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate made

¶21

under Section 14 of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

¶22

Despite service, none appears for the respondents / financial

¶23

institution.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the

¶25

conditional order passed by this Court dated 02.02.2023 has been complied with and the respondents / financial institution has also re-classified the account

¶26

as standard account. Hence, nothing survives in the writ petition.

¶27

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

¶28

Page No.2 of 4

¶29

W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023

¶30

Recording the said submission, the Writ Petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶31

(R.S.M, J.) (L.V.G, J.) 21.08.2024 Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No bala

¶32

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

¶33

Page No.3 of 4

¶34

W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023

¶35

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶36

bala

¶37

ORDER MADE IN W.P(MD)No.2160 of 2023 DATED : 21.08.2024

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4 of 4

Dinesh Babu. K v. The Branch Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Babu. K v. The Branch Manager

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

J.Valarmery Vs The District Collector

Pappa Chrishma.C Vs The Chief Manager

Karpaga Narayanan .N Vs The District Collector

The Vice Chancellor Vs R.Ravichandran

Kasinadhan Vs Meyyappan

Chellappa.S Vs The Chairman / District Collector