K.Periyasamy v. The Registrar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 05.10.2021 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH W.P.NO.20120 OF 2021 K.Periyasamy ... Petitioner -Vs1. The Registrar, Co-operative Housing Society, No.40, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai - 7.

2. The Director/Additional Registrar, Co-operative Housing Federation, No.40, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai-7.

3. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Housing Society, Salem (Circle), Salem.

4. The President, SLM/HSG.85, Meichery Housing Co-operative Society, Meichery, Salem.

... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation dated 02.08.2021 with regard to return of the petitioner's original house documents bearing Loan No.362, the document is in custody with SLM/HSG 85 Cooperative Housing Society, Meichery, Mettur Taluk, Salem District. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Chandrasekaran For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Government Advocate for RR 1 & 3 Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai - for R2 Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Government Advocate - for R3

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the first and second respondents to consider the representation made by the petitioner on 02.08.2021 wherein the petitioner has complained that, the original documents that were given as security for the loan obtained from the fourth respondent Society has not been returned back in spite of the entire loan being settled by the petitioner.

2. The case of the petitioner is that, he is a member of the fourth respondent society and he obtained a housing loan from the fourth respondent and the original title deeds were given as security for the said loan. The further case of the petitioner is that he has repaid back the entire loan in the year 2018. Thereafter, he was repeatedly approaching the Secretary of the fourth respondent Society to return back the original documents that were given as security. The fourth respondent obtained signature from the petitioner in various papers and the petitioner, who claims to be an illiterate person, was not aware of the contents of the documents in which he had subscribed his signature. Ultimately, the original documents were not returned back to the petitioner and hence the petitioner made a complaint to the first and second respondents on 02.08.2021. Since the same was not considered, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court seeking for appropriate directions.

3. Heard Mr.R.Chandrasekaran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 and 3, Mr.S.Kanmani Annamalai, learned counsel for the second respondent and Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, learned Government Advocate for the fourth respondent.

4. When the matter came up for hearing on 21.09.2021, this Court passed the following order.

"Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Government Counsel takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3. Mr.Mukilan, learned Government Counsel takes notice for the 4th respondent. The learned Government Counsel appearing on behalf of the 4th respondent submitted that the petitioner has already received the documents and he has also acknowledged by signing the relevant records.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an illiterate person and his signature has been obtained in blank papers and he has not received the original documents from the

4th respondent.

3.The learned Government Counsel shall take written instructions from the 4th respondent and the original records acknowledging the receipt of the documents shall be produced before this Court. Post this case immediately after admission on 05.10.2021."

5. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent produced the original records. On perusing the original records, it is seen that there is a document dated 04.03.2020 which shows that the petitioner has repaid back the entire loan on 03.05.2018 and he has received the original documents from the fourth respondent Society on 04.03.2020.

6. When this was brought to the notice of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel vehemently questioned the validity of the document and submitted that the signature that was obtained from the petitioner is misused and such a document has been fabricated. Learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his stand that the petitioner has not received the original documents which were given as a security when the petitioner obtained the loan from the fourth respondent Society.

7. In the considered opinion of this Court, the dispute is factual in nature. This Court will not be able to give a definite finding as to whether the petitioner received the original documents from the fourth respondent and whether the document that has been produced before this Court was fabricated by the fourth respondent Society. Such finding requires appreciation of evidence and that may not be possible for this Court exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

8. However, taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has already settled the entire loan amount to the fourth respondent Society as early as on 03.05.2018 and the petitioner wants to deal with the property, this Court deems it fit and proper to pass an appropriate order which will ensure that the interest of the petitioner in the property is safeguarded and the petitioner is able to deal with his property without any problems in future, in the absence of the original title documents.

9. In view of the above, the petitioner is directed to apply for the certified copy of the documents before the concerned Sub Registrar office. The certified copy of the documents shall be

treated as the original title deeds of the petitioner. Thereby, the petitioner will be able to deal with his property. Once such an assurance is given to the petitioner, the non availability of the original title deeds will not really come in the way of the petitioner to deal with the property.

10. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VIII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KST To 1.

The Registrar, Co-operative Housing Society, No.40, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai - 7.

2.

The Director/Additional Registrar, Co-operative Housing Federation, No.40, Ritherdon Road, Vepery, Chennai - 7.

3.

The Deputy Registrar Co-operative Housing Society Salem (Circle), Salem.

4.

The President, SLM/HSG.85 Meichery Housing Co-operative Society Meichery, Salem.

+1cc to Mr.R.Chandrasekaran, Advocate, S.R.No.51954 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.52792 W.P.NO.20120 OF 2021 GSM(CO) PBS/28/10/2021