Madras High CourtWP(MD)/14801/2022dismissed

Jeyapandi.P v. The Authorized Officer

2022-07-11Honourable Mr Justice S.S. Sundar,Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.07.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.P(MD)No.14801 of 2022 and W.M.P(MD)No.10583 of 2022 P.Jeyapandi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Authorized Officer, Rep. through its Authorized Officer, Canara Bank, Madurai LIC Sellur Branch, Madurai.

2.The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Madurai LIC Sellur Branch, Madurai.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned notices of the respondents in MDU/REC/SN/012/2022-23 issued by the first respondent dated 29.04.2022 and CB/SELLUR/NPA/PP/JEYAPANDI/2022 dated 01.07.2022 issued by the second respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to provide further time to pay the installments. For Petitioner :Mr.T.Raja *** 1/4

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.) Heard Mr.T.Raja, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. This writ petition is filed challenging the notice dated 29.04.2022, issued by the first respondent and the subsequent notice issued by the second respondent, dated 01.07.2022.

3. After the sale proceedings are over, the notice dated 01.07.2022, is issued to the petitioner informing him that the property has been sold in the E-auction for a sum of Rs.19,60,000/-. Further, the petitioner was directed to vacate the premises.

4. This Court is of the view that the petitioner though challenges the sale notice, has not raised any ground or pointed out any irregularities in the sale notice. After the sale notice, the property has been sold in favour of a third party. But, without impleading the third party, the present writ petition is filed challenging the sale notice and also the subsequent communication sent to the petitioner directing him to vacate the premises.

2/4

5. This Court is therefore find no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. However, it may be open to the petitioner to challenge the sale that had taken place after impleading the auction purchaser in the manner known to law. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [S.S.S.R., J.] [S.S.Y., J.] 11.07.2022 Index : Yes / No pm 3/4

S.S.SUNDAR, J.

and S.SRIMATHY , J.

pm W.P(MD)No.14801 of 2022 11.07.2022 4/4