S.Suthan Selvam v. The Chief Manager

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.04.2018

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH W.P.(MD) No.8194 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.7749 & 7750 of 2018 S.Suthan Selvam ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Chief Manager Indian Bank Yagappa Nagar Branch No.3, Arulanadaramma Nagar Yagappanagar Extension Thanjavur 613 007

2. Head Operations Reliance ARC INB Retail Port Folio Trust (2013) Reliance Centre, 6th Floor North Wing, Prabhat Colony Santacruz(East) Mumbai 400 055

3. Sugha Sajuna Reliance Commercial Finance Limited Reliance House 4th Floor No.5, Haddows Road Nungambakkam, Chennai 600 006 ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Ceriorarified Mandamus, calling for the letter of second respondent Letter No.FY/1718/INTLTR/INDR/0344, Dated 13.11.2017 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to receive the amount contemplated in the order dated 03.01.2016 in MA.No.40/2014 and MA.No.52/2016 in O.A.No.180/2013 on the file of the Debts Recovery Tribunal III Chennai.

For Petitioner :

Mr.M.Ashok Kumar For Respondents :

Mr.Pala Ramasamy

O R D E R

Mr.Pala Ramasamy, learned Standing Counsel, takes notice for the respondents.

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the alleged outstanding amount stated in the impugned order has not been clarified and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the demand is without any basis.

4. Though the petitioner has sought for a larger relief to quash the impugned proceedings, dated 13.11.2017, passed by the second respondent herein, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would be satisfied if the relief sought for is moulded and the representation of the petitioner, dated 12.12.2017 is directed to be considered on its own merits.

5. The learned Standing Counsel also submitted that if a specific direction is given to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 12.12.2017, the same would be complied with.

6. In view of the limited prayer sought for now, there shall be a direction to the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 12.12.2017, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Such an exercise shall be done after giving due opportunity to the petitioner as well as to the respondents 1 and 3.

7. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(W) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar +1cc to Mr.Pala Ramasamy, Advocate Sr.No.61435 +1cc to Mr.K.Sakthivel, Advocate Sr.No.61674 KRK VB/SV/SAR4/03/05/2018/2P/3C W.P.(MD) No.8194 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.7749 & 7750 of 2018 16.04.2018 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/