Disposed¶29

P.Suresh v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC14 May 2025WMP/19632/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court order dated 14.05.2025 in W.M.P.No.19632 of 2025 in W.P.No.20241 of 2020; modification of interim restraint against creating third-party rights over land and superstructure; clarification permitting renewal of pre-existing mortgage (Document No.4600/2019 dated 30.05.2019) and enhancement of credit facility; petitioner P.Suresh; respondents include State of Tamil Nadu (Housing and Urban Development) and Greater Chennai Corporation officials; bench G.R.Swaminathan and V.Lakshminarayanan, JJ.; miscellaneous petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Clarification that the interim restriction does not prevent the petitioner from renewing the existing mortgage (Document No.4600/2019 dated 30.05.2019) or seeking enhancement of the credit facility under it; writ miscellaneous petition disposed of accordingly. ¶29

P.Suresh Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

W.M.P.No.19632 of 2025 in W.P.No.20241 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 14.05.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

W.M.P.No.19632 of 2025

¶7

¶8

W.P.No.20241 of 2020

¶9

P.Suresh S/o.V.Panchapakesan

¶10

Petitioner

¶11

¶12

The State of Tamilnadu Rep By Its Secretary To Government, Dept of Housing And Urban Development, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009 and 4 Others

¶13

Respondents

¶14

For Petitioner: Mr.P.V.Balasubramaniam for Ms.R.Kamala Rani

¶15

For Respondents: Ms.R.Anitha, Special Government Pleader [R1] Mr.E.C.Ramesh, Standing Counsel [R2 to R5] *****

¶16

ORDER

¶17

This miscellaneous petition has been filed seeking to modify

¶18

the restriction imposed on the petitioner vide order dated 06.01.2021 passed in W.P.No.20241 of 2020.

¶19

1/4

¶20

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

¶21

W.M.P.No.19632 of 2025 in W.P.No.20241 of 2020

¶22

The Hon'ble Division Bench had directed that the petitioner

¶23

shall not create any third party rights in respect of the land and the

¶24

superstructure in question till the disposal of the writ petition.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petition

¶26

mentioned property had already been mortgaged in favour of a financial institution on 30.05.2019 in Document No.4600/2019.

¶27

We make it clear that the restrictions imposed by this Court

¶28

will not come in the way of the petitioner from renewing the said mortgage or seeking for enhancement of the credit facility under that existing mortgage.

¶29

This writ miscellaneous petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶30

[G.R.S., J] [V.L.N., J] 14.05.2025

¶31

gm/kak

¶32

2/4

¶33

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

¶34

W.M.P.No.19632 of 2025 in W.P.No.20241 of 2020