Disposed¶25

Yogalakshmi.v v. The Authorized Officer

Madras HC14 Oct 2025WP(MD)/22626/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench; W.P.(MD) No.22626 of 2023, decided 14.10.2025; Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, C.J. and R. Poornima, J.; housing finance loan recovery possession notice dated 22.08.2023 by Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited (MRHFL); One Time Settlement; petition disposed of as infructuous upon settlement of loan account; no order as to costs; connected interim application closed; no merits adjudicated; Article 226 certiorarified mandamus.

What did the court decide?

On the petitioner's statement that her loan account stood settled and no liability existed, the Court disposed of the writ petition as having rendered infructuous, made no order as to costs, and closed the connected interim application. No decision was rendered on the validity of the possession notice or the One Time Settlement proposal. ¶25

Yogalakshmi.v Vs The Authorized Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.22626 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 14.10.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.22626 of 2023 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD) No.18862 of 2023

¶8

V.Yogalakshmi ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Authorized Officer Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited (MRHFL), Sadhana House, 4^th Floor, Mahndra Towers, P.K.Kurne Chowk, Worli, Mumbai 400 018.

¶11

The Branch Manager Mahindra Rural Housing Finance Limited (MRHFL), Aranthangi Taluk, Pudukkottai District. ... Respondents

¶12

________ Page 1 of 4

¶13

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

¶14

PRAYER:

¶15

W.P.(MD) No.22626 of 2023

¶16

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned possession notice issued by the 2^nd respondent dated 22.08.2023 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to consider the One Time Settlement proposal of the petitioner within a time stipulated by this Court.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Paranjothi for M/s.KBS Law Office For Respondents : Ms.B.Deepa

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

[Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE]

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that as the loan account of the petitioner has already been settled and there does not exist any liability, the petitioner does not wish to press the matter any more.

¶21

________ Page 2 of 4

¶22

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

¶23

W.P.(MD) No.22626 of 2023

¶24