V.Sundar v. The Additional Registrar General
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.06.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN 1.V.Sundar 2.S.Rajeswari ... Petitioners vs.
The Additional Registrar General, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
... Respondent PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent/the Additional Registrar General, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court to refund the deposited partial bid amount of Rs.82,67,000/- with accumulated interest to the petitioners as requested by the petitioners' through representation dated 29.07.2025.
1/8
For Petitioners : Mr.T.K.Gopalan For Respondent : Mr.S.Venkatesh Standing Counsel
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) W.M.P(MD)No.11733 of 2026 filed seeking permission to file a single Writ Petition is ordered.
2.The petitioners have filed the present Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondent/the Additional Registrar General, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, to refund the deposited partial bid amount of Rs.82,67,000/- along with accrued interest to the petitioners, pursuant to their representation dated 29.07.2025.
3.The petitioners' case in brief is as follows: 3.1.Sri Ramu Travels was started by the petitioners' family about 60 years ago and operated stage carriage buses on the Madurai-Kallal route. 2/8
The permit originally stood in the name of the first petitioner's mother, who died on 18.12.2012. Thereafter, the permit was transferred to the first petitioner's father with the consent of all legal heirs. The first petitioner's father died on 28.06.2013. Subsequently, the first petitioner along with his brothers formed a partnership and sought transfer of the transport permit in their names.
3.2.The transport authority insisted on obtaining "No Objection" letters from the first petitioner's sisters, which led to disputes and resulted in the pendency of the transfer application. A writ petition was filed in W.P(MD)No.17512 of 2021 and this Court directed sale of the buses through court auction.
3.3.In the court auction held on 25.06.2023, the first petitioner emerged as the highest bidder for a sum of Rs.2,48,00,000/-. The petitioners deposited Rs.82,67,000/-, being one-third of the bid amount, but failed to deposit the remaining sum of Rs.1,65,33,000/- due to financial difficulties. 3/8
3.4.Thereafter, the petitioners sought refund of the amount already deposited, but no response was received. The petitioners also instituted a partition suit in O.S.No.98 of 2023 before the learned Additional Subordinate Court, Madurai, claiming that the buses and permit form part of the joint family properties and are subject matter of partition. In these circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court seeking appropriate relief.
4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for either side and perused the materials available on record.
5.On perusal of the materials available on record, it is seen that the first petitioner was declared as the successful bidder for transfer of the stage carriage permits. The bid was concluded for a sum of Rs.2,48,00,000/-. Pursuant to the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court dated 12.06.2023, the petitioners were directed to deposit one-third of the bid 4/8
amount on or before 28.06.2023 to the credit of W.P(MD)No.17512 of 2021, with a further direction to deposit the balance amount on or before 12.08.2023, and the matter was posted for reporting compliance on 16.08.2023. The petitioners have deposited the said amount. 6.When the matter was listed on 16.08.2023, the learned Single Judge of this Court appointed one Mr.P.Devaraj, District Judge (Retired), as an Arbitrator to examine the issues involved and posted the matter to 08.10.2023.
7.When the matter came up for hearing on 11.10.2023, the learned Single Judge of this Court, taking note of the earlier order, disposed of the writ petition with a direction that the Arbitrator shall decide the issue with regard to the amount deposited to the credit of the writ petition in the arbitration proceedings. Subsequently, a Review Application in Rev.Aplw (MD) No.61 of 2024 was filed seeking review of the order dated 11.10.2023 passed in W.P. (MD) No.17512 of 2021. The learned Single Judge of this 5/8
Court, by order dated 05.12.2024, dismissed the said review application by a detailed order.
8.Having failed in all their attempts, the present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction for refund of the amount deposited to the credit of the writ petition. Since the issue has already been referred to arbitration, the question of refund also falls within the scope of the arbitral proceedings. Therefore, the maintainability of the present writ petition is doubtful. Further, the petitioners have impleaded only the Additional Registrar General as a party respondent and have not impleaded the necessary private parties, which indicates an attempt to obtain an order in the absence of necessary parties. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the order dismissing the review application, it is open to them to work out their remedy in the manner known to law.
6/8
9.Accordingly, we find no merit in the writ petition. The Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. [N.S.K.,J.] [M.J.R.,J.] 15.06.2026 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes ps To The Additional Registrar General, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
7/8
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
and M.JOTHIRAMAN , J.
ps DATED : 15.06.2026 8/8