Madras High Court
P.Shanthi vs Canara Bank on 3 April, 2025
Author: J.Nisha Banu
Bench: J.Nisha Banu, S.Srimathy
W.P(MD)No.5565 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.04.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P(MD)No.5565 of 2025
and
WMP(MD)No.4061 of 2025
P.Shanthi ... Petitioner
vs.
1. Canara Bank,
Represented by its Authorised Officer,
Asset Recovery Branch,
1st Floor, Circle Office,
East Veli Street,
Madurai-1.
2. I.Ruban ... Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the
1st respondent from taking any coercive action till the disposal of the
application filed by the petitioner before the learned Debt Recovery
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, in Diary No.332/2025.
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 07:53:53 pm )
W.P(MD)No.5565 of 2025
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
For R1 : Mr.P.Pethu Rajesh
For R2 : Mr.Muthuramalingam
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.SRIMATHY, J.)
The petitioner has filed this writ petition to forbear the 1st
respondent from taking any coercive action until the disposal of the
application filed by the petitioner before the learned Debt Recovery
Appellate Tribunal, Chennai, in Diary No.322/2025.
2. The contention of the petitioner is that her husband was
running a business in the name and style of 'IFG Control System' and he
obtained loan from the 1st respondent / Bank. Unfortunately, he died.
The residential house of the petitioner was mortgaged for the said loan.
Now the petitioner is ready and willing to pay the sale amount which
was paid by the 2nd respondent/auction purchaser.
3. This court through an interim order dated 28.02.2025,
directed that the said amount to be deposited by the petitioner to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 07:53:53 pm )
tune of Rs.58,20,000/-, shall be kept in No Lien Account. The petitioner
has deposited the same.
4. The 2nd respondent/purchaser submitted that he had
borrowed money in order to purchase the property and is paying
interest to the same. Further, he had incurred expenses towards
purchase of the property. Hence, he prayed to direct the petitioner to
pay the same.
5. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to pay a sum of Rs.
3,00,0000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs only), within a period of one week
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The 2nd respondent is
directed to withdraw Rs.58,20,000/- plus Rs.3,00,000/- and he will move
out from the said transaction. The sale certificate in the name of the 2nd
respondent shall be cancelled.
6. The 1st respondent would vehemently oppose for issuing
such direction. However, this Court is inclined to grant such direction
for the sole reason that the petitioner is not the borrower and her
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 07:53:53 pm )
husband is the borrower and mortgaged the residential house. The
petitioner has already given a demand draft for Rs.10,00,000/-.
However, the Bank has not encashed the same. Therefore, the petitioner
is directed to issue a fresh demand draft. The Bank is directed to encash
the same. Since the entire amount under OTS is paid by the petitioner,
the Bank shall settle the accounts and close the loan of the petitioner,
issue no due certificate and release the document to the petitioner.
7. This judgment cannot be referred or cited as a precedent
since based on the facts and circumstances of the present case, we have
passed this order.
8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[J.N.B, J.] [S.S.Y, J.]
03.04.2025
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
bala
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 07:53:53 pm )
J.NISHA BANU, J.
AND
S.SRIMATHY, J.
bala
ORDER MADE IN
DATED : 03.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/04/2025 07:53:53 pm )
