U.Dakshinamurthy, v. The Managing Director

W.P.No.35942 of 2016 and WMP.Nos.33818 & 33819 of 2016 Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

In this case, the admitted position is that the petitioner has misplaced the original purchase deed dated 08.05.1989. He has produced a certified copy and the genuineness of that document is not disputed by the respondents.

2.However and this clarification is provided by learned counsel for the respondents to elaborate on the nonspeaking order passed, the only allegation leveled relates to the nonproduction of original qua Clause 1(2) of the Guidelines, on account of which the petitioner does not satisfy, the definition of distressed persons.

3.At request of respondent counsel to submit case law in support of his case, list on 03.03.2023.

22.02.2023 vs https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis