Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola vs District Registrar (Administration)
2023 Latest Caselaw 14660 Mad

Madras High Court

Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola vs District Registrar (Administration) on 23 November, 2023

Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala, D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

                                                                          W.A.No.3254 of 2023


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED: 23.11.2023

                                                       CORAM

                             THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                                        AND
                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY


                                                W.A.No.3254 of 2023

                     Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola                 ..     Appellant in person


                                                        Vs.

                     1. District Registrar (Administration)
                        Chennai Central, No.182, Bharati Salai
                        Pycrafts Road, Royapettah
                        Chennai – 600 014.

                     2. Joseph Paul
                     3. V.Eswaramoorthy
                     4. Udhayakumar

                     5.The Branch Manager
                        Pubjab National Bank
                        No.44, Taylors Road, Kilpauk
                        Chennai – 600 010.

                     6. The Chief Manager
                        Bank of India, Chennai Large Corporate Branch
                        IV Floor, Tarapore Towers
                        826, Anna Salai
                        Chennai – 600 002.                   ..   Respondents


                     Page 1 of 6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               W.A.No.3254 of 2023




                     Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
                     order in W.P.No.17631 of 2022 dated 19.01.2023.


                                      Appellant in person      : Mr.Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola




                                                         JUDGMENT

(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

Heard Mr.Ajay Francis Inigo Loyola, the appellant-in-person.

2. The appellant-in-person filed a writ petition seeking a

direction to consider his representation, so as to renew the

registration of the Sunset Terrace Owners' Association. The learned

Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. The appellant-in-person

has filed an instant appeal against the said judgment.

3. The appellant-in-person is an advocate, who appears in

person. According to the appellant-in-person, he was not aware that

the society was defunct until the counter was filed. The entire

struggle of the appellant-in-person was to see that the law is abided

by and the society is registered for the benefit of all the Members.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

The appellant-in-person has no ulterior intention. He further submits

that thereafter the appellant-in-person has also filed a rectification

and one of the members has filed a suit before the Civil Civil Court

for appropriate relief. The learned Single Judge has made some

observations against the appellant-in-person. According to the

appellant-in-person, the same be expunged.

4. We have read the judgment delivered by the learned Single

Judge. In fact, the learned Single Judge has not passed any

strictures against the appellant-in-person. On the contrary, observed

that the appellant-in-person is an advocate; he can use his legal

expertise for ensuring that the society, which is struck down, is once

again brought back to life by taking steps in accordance with the

provisions of law, which govern the registered societies. The learned

Single Judge only observed that the writ petition was not a proper

remedy for the same.

5. It may be that the appellant-in-person is not redressing his

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

personal grievance, however, probably was trying to revive the

defunct society. According to the appellant-in-person, he bonafidely

believed that the writ petition was the proper remedy. In view of

that, the observations of the learned Single Judge are not to be

construed as strictures. It was only to observe that the appellant-in-

person ought to have taken proper steps to revive the society.

6. With these observations, the writ appeal stands disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs.

                                                             (S.V.G., CJ.)           (D.B.C., J.)
                                                                                     23.11.2023
                     Index            : Yes/No
                     Neutral Citation : Yes/No

                     drm







https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis





                     To

1. District Registrar (Administration) Chennai Central, No.182, Bharati Salai Pycrafts Road, Royapettah Chennai – 600 014.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

(drm)

23.11.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis