R.Arumugam, Vs the Chennai Metropolitan Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd.

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Mandamus, direct the 1^st respondent (i) to provide account closure certificate and cancel the mortgage deed by or mortgage discharge receipt before the concern Sub Registrar office (ii) to provide Original Documents to the petitioner based on the petitioners representation dated 05.03.2024.

¶22

For Petitioner: Mr.T.Pon Suyambu Vinayaham

¶23

For Respondents: Mr.R.Ravi Bharathi for R1 Mr.Chakkaravarthy, Government Counsel for R2 and R3 No appearance for R4 to R6

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the 1^st respondent

¶26

to provide account closure certificate and cancel the mortgage deed by or mortgage discharge receipt before the concern Sub Registrar office and also to provide Original Documents to the petitioner based on the petitioner’s representation dated 05.03.2024.

¶27

The brief case of the petitioner is that the petitioner and his wife jointly mortgaged the property situate at No.18, Raji Street, Chinna Sekkadu, Manali, Chennai 600 068 to the 1^st respondent Society to secure a loan of Rs.10,00,000/availed on 23.03.2018. Subsequently, the petitioner’s wife passed away on 30.09.2020. The said mortgage loan was fully discharged and settled on 23.12.2022. Following the clearance of the loan, the petitioner approached the 1^st respondent for the return of the original title deeds of the schedule-mentioned 2/5

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 14767 of 2024

¶30

property by submitting a representation on 05.03.2024. However, the said representation has not been considered till date and the 1^st respondent has failed to return the original documents to the petitioner.

¶31

The 1^st respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that if the petitioner

¶32

along with his other legal heirs approaches the 1^st respondent with a legal heirship certificate, the original documents shall be handed over to them through the proper channel.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶34

In view of the limited prayer sought for the petitioner, without going into the merits of the case, this Court directs the 1^st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 05.03.2024 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The consideration of the said representation shall be duly intimated to the respondents 4 to 6 also.

¶35

3/5

¶36

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

¶37

WP No. 14767 of 2024

¶38