K.R.Jayachitra vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 24696 Mad

                                                                            W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                DATED : 15.12.2021

                                                      CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

                                            W.P.(MD)No.9567 of 2019
                                           (Through video Conference)

                    K.R.Jayachitra                                      .. Petitioner

                                                       Vs.

                    1.The District Collector,
                    Sivagangai District,
                    Sivagangai.

                    2.The Superintendent of Police,
                    Sivagangai District,
                    Sivagangai.

                    3.The Regional Manager,
                    The Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd.,
                    Annanagar,
                    Madurai-625 020.

                    4.The Branch Manager,
                    The Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd.,
                    SPK Corporate Center II Floor,
                    45,Shanmugaraja Road,
                    Karaikudi-630 002.

                    5.Sampath
                    Loan-in-Charge,
                    The Tamilnadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd.,

                    _____________
                    Page Nos.1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019


                    SPK Corporate Center II Floor,
                    45,Shanmugaraja Road,
                    Karaikudi-630 002.                                       .. Respondents


                    PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

                    to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent to enquire

                    into the petitioner's representation, dated 26.03.2019 and to take

                    appropriate action against the 4th and 5th respondents, who unlawfully

                    entered into the petitioner's company taken away things worth of

                    Rs.13,83,500/- and hand over the same to the petitioner.

                                         For Petitioner   : Mr.M.Sankar

                                         For R1 and R2    : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh
                                                           Government Advocate
                                         For R3           : No appearance
                                         For R4           : Mr.R.Saravanan


                                                          ORDER

Alleging that the fifth respondent unlawfully entered into the

go-down of the petitioner and repossess the material, on the basis of the

letter, dated 15.06.2018, forwarded by the first respondent/District

Collector to the second respondent/Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai

District, the present writ petition is filed to direct the second respondent

to enquire into the matter and hand over the material worth about

_____________ Page Nos.2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019

Rs.13,83,500/-.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner claims that she availed loan

from fourth respondent for a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- on 20.11.2015 and

thereafter, issued a foreclosure notice on 03.03.2017 without releasing the

subsidy amount of Rs.3,86,000/- as promised. In the said circumstances,

the property was now taken possession pursuant to the subsequent

foreclosure notice, dated 18.05.2017.

3. The learned Government Advocate would submit that with very

same averments and for the same relief, the husband of the petitioner

earlier filed W.P(MD).No.7252 of 2019 before this Court and this Court

on 27.03.2019, passed the following order:

“The petitioner seeks an issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the second respondent to enquire on the representation of the petitioner dated 02.06.2018, wherein, he had alleged that the fourth and fifth respondents herein had unlawfully entered into his premises and removed the articles worth Rs.13,83,500/-.

2.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government

_____________ Page Nos.3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019

Advocate (Crl. side) appearing for the respondents.

3.If the petitioner is aggrieved that his complaint to the Police to register a criminal case has not borne fruits, then, as per the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court reported in 2018-2-L.W.(Crl.)489- (G.Prabakaran Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur District and another), the petitioner has to approach only the Superintendent of Police, or the Jurisdictional Magistrate, with a complaint under Section 190 Cr.P.C.

4.In view of the above, the Writ Petition is not maintainable and the same stands closed accordingly. No costs.”

4. Suppressing the above said fact, the present writ petitioner has

filed the present writ petition with same cause of action, same relief and

same averments claiming as if she is the owner of the property and

availed loan from the fourth respondent. On perusing the order passed by

this Court in W.P(MD)No.7273 of 2019 and the prayer sought in that writ

petition and the prayer sought in this writ petition, this Court finds that

the submission made by the learned Government Advocate is correct.

_____________ Page Nos.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019

5. Further, the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent

would submit that it is a clear abuse of process of law by the writ

petitioner by filing the present writ petition after disposal of the earlier

writ petition for the same relief before this Court, when the statutory

remedy, if any, is to move the territorial Tribunal.

6.This Court, on considering the submission and on perusing the

records finds that the petitioner herein has come to this Court with

unclean hands. First, she has invoked the writ jurisdiction alleging that

the complaint given to the police had not been acted upon inspite of the

fact that the TIIC Finance institution has resorted to SARFAESI Act and

resorted to recover all the money following the due process of law.

Secondly, she has suppressed the filing of writ petition by her husband for

the very same relief and dismissal of the said writ petition stating that the

writ petition is not maintainable. Yet another factor, which cause

disturbance to this Court is that the very same counsel, who has filed writ

petition for the husband has filed this petition for the wife. Since the

petitioner approached this Court with unclean hands and abuse the

process of law, this writ petition is dismissed with cost of Rs.50,000/-

_____________ Page Nos.5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019

(Rupees Fifty thousand only) payable to the State Legal Services

Authority attached to the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai,

within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order. No Costs.

15.12.2021 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PJL

Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.

To

1.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

2.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

_____________ Page Nos.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.9567 of 2019

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

PJL

W.P.(MD)No.9567 of 2019

15.12.2021

_____________ Page Nos.7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis