Madras High Court
S.Albert Sundararaj vs The Registrar Of Cooperatives on 27 April, 2022
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
S.Albert Sundararaj .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Registrar of Cooperatives,
E.V.R. Periyar Salai,
Kilpauk,
Chennai 600 010.
2.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Office of Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Krishnagiri Region,
13, 4th Street, West Joint Road,
Cooperative Quarters,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
3.The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Office of Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Krishnagiri Region,
13, 4th Street, West Joint Road,
Cooperative Quarters,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
4.The Secretary,
D.K.94, Krishnagiri Panchayat Union Teachers and
Workers Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society (Ltd),
Cooperative Colony, 1st Cross,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
5.The President/Secretary,
D.K.94, Krishnagiri Panchayat Union Teachers and
Workers Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society (Ltd),
Krishnagiri. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records pertaining to the rejection of petitioner representation dated
26.12.2019 by the 4th respondent through his communication dated
22.11.2021 and quash the same, consequently, issue direction, directing the 4 th
respondent to return the insurance claim amount of petitioner's wife I.Angela
Mary which was obtained at the time of sanctioning the loan in favour of
petitioner's wife, failing which direct the 4th respondent to return the amount
paid by the petitioner to the tune of Rs.6,41,500/- by considering petitioner's
representation dated 26.12.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Marudhachalamurthy
For RR1 to 3 : Mr.U.Baranidharan
(Additional Government Pleader)
For R4 : Mr.P.Ganesan
For R5 : Mr.A.Selvendran
(Special Government Pleader)
2/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the impugned
communication of the 4th respondent dated 22.11.2021 and consequently, to
consider the representation of the petitioner dated 26.12.2019.
2.According to the petitioner, his wife I.Angela Mary is a member of
the 4th respondent Society. She used to borrow money from 4 th respondent
Society and repay the same without fail. On 13.06.2017, she borrowed a sum
of Rs.7,00,000/- from the 4th respondent Society. Subsequently, she died on
22.04.2018. The 4th respondent has to follow the Act and Rules and the
circular issued by the 1st respondent while sanctioning the loan. After death of
his wife, the 4th respondent asked the petitioner to pay the outstanding amount
and close the loan. The petitioner requested the 4 th respondent to close the
loan by way of insurance claim as 4 th respondent obtained policy in the name
of the petitioner's wife for sanctioning the loan. But, however, the Secretary of
the 4th respondent asked the petitioner to settle the loan amount and assured
that he will claim the insurance amount and settle the same in favour of the
petitioner. Believing the same, the petitioner settled the outstanding amount of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
Rs.6,41,500/- in favour of the 4th respondent, but the 4th respondent did not
keep up his words. Hence, the petitioner sent representation to the 1st
respondent and also to the respondents 2 and 3 and filed W.P.No.19154 of
2020. The said Writ Petition is pending. While the Writ Petition is pending,
the 4th respondent erroneously rejected the representation of the petitioner.
Hence, the petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition, challenging
the said rejection order.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that order
of the 4th respondent, without hearing the petitioner, is arbitrary. As per the
circular No.27/2014 dated 28.10.2014 issued by the 1st respondent sent to all
the Cooperative Societies, direction has been given to all the Cooperative
Societies to take insurance at the time of sanctioning loan. Therefore, the 1st
respondent is liable to claim the insurance amounts and settle the same to the
petitioner and hence, prayed for setting aside the order of the 4th respondent.
4(i).The respondents 2 and 4 filed separate counter affidavits and
denied all the averments made by the petitioner. Mr.U.Baranidharan, learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3,
Mr.P.Ganesan, learned counsel appearing for the 4 th respondent as well as
Mr.A.Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 5th
respondent separately submitted that even though the Writ Petition filed by
the petitioner was pending, the 4th respondent considered the representation of
the petitioner and passed orders on merits. The learned Special Government
Pleader further submitted that when the circular of 1st respondent was
received by the Society, it was discussed with the members of the Society.
Most of the members were not willing to take group insurance as they have to
pay substantial premium, which will be deducted from their account. The 4 th
respondent Society did not take any insurance at the time of sanctioning the
loan as members were not willing to pay the premium. Subsequently, taking
the insurance by members was made optional at the request of the members.
The petitioner's wife did not opt for taking insurance and no insurance was
taken in the name of the petitioner's wife. The Secretary denied having given
any assurance to claim the insurance amount as there was no insurance taken
in the name of the petitioner's wife.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
4(ii).The learned Special Government Pleader further submitted that the
Writ Petition filed challenging the order of the Cooperative Society is not
maintainable and remedy available to the petitioner is only to raise arbitration
proceedings under Section 90 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act,
1983 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act'). In the impugned order of the 4 th
respondent itself, the 4th respondent has stated that the petitioner can raise
dispute under Section 90 of the Act, if he is aggrieved and prayed for
dismissal of the Writ Petition.
5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned
Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3, learned
counsel appearing for the 4th respondent as well as the learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the 5th respondent and perused all the
materials available on record.
6.The learned Special Government Pleader has taken the objection to
the maintainability of the Writ Petition as impugned order passed by 4th
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
respondent Society and as per the Full Bench judgment of this Court reported
in 2006 (4) CTC 689 [K.Marappan Vs. Deputy Registrar of Cooperative
Societies, Namakkal], the petitioner is not entitled to invoke writ jurisdiction
of relief sought for in the Writ Petition. The said contention has considerable
force and is acceptable. In addition to the same, the Writ Petition is not
maintainable on merits also. It is the case of the petitioner that when his wife
took loan from the 4th respondent, the 4th respondent has taken insurance
policy as per the circular No.27/2014 of the 1 st respondent and the Secretary
of the 4th respondent assured the petitioner that the 4th respondent can claim
the insurance amount from the insurance company and pay it to the petitioner.
On the other hand, it is the case of the 4 th respondent and learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the 5th respondent that most of the
members of the 4th respondent were not willing to take insurance for the
amounts borrowed by them and they were not willing to pay the premium for
the insurance policy. According to the respondents, the petitioner's wife did
not opt for insurance for the amounts borrowed by her and no premium was
paid by her. The 4th respondent also denied the claim of the petitioner that the
Secretary of the Society assured him that Society will claim insurance amount
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
from the insurance company and pay to the petitioner. According to the 4th
respondent, when there is no insurance policy taken by wife of the petitioner,
the Secretary did not assure the petitioner to claim the insurance amount and
pay to him. From the above materials, it is seen that there are rival contentions
with regard to insurance policy. When the petitioner claims that the insurance
policy was taken when his wife borrowed money, it is for the petitioner to
prove the said contention by filing documents and raise the dispute under
Section 90 of the Act for redressal of his grievances. Hence, the Writ Petition
is not maintainable even on merits.
In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
27.04.2022
Index : Yes / No
gsa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
To
1.The Registrar of Cooperatives,
E.V.R. Periyar Salai,
Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.
2.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Office of Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Krishnagiri Region,
13, 4th Street, West Joint Road,
Cooperative Quarters,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
3.The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Office of Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Krishnagiri Region,
13, 4th Street, West Joint Road,
Cooperative Quarters,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
4.The Secretary,
D.K.94, Krishnagiri Panchayat Union Teachers and
Workers Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society (Ltd),
Cooperative Colony, 1st Cross,
Krishnagiri 635 001.
5.The President/Secretary,
D.K.94, Krishnagiri Panchayat Union Teachers and
Workers Cooperative Thrift & Credit Society (Ltd),
Krishnagiri.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI, J.,
gsa
W.P.No.28241 of 2021
27.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
