Madras High Court
M/S.Thili.Spl.133 vs M.Valli .. 1St on 4 March, 2025
C.R.P.(MD) No.2242 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 04.03.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
C.R.P.(MD) No.2242 of 2022
(W.P.(MD) No.17982 of 2013)
[Writ petition is converted as CRP vide order in
W.P.(MD) No.17982 of 2013, dated 19.07.2022]
and
M.P.(MD) No.1 of 2013
and
C.M.P.(MD) No.10550 of 2022
M/s.Thili.Spl.133, Virusampatti Primary
Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd.,
Rep., by its Secretary,
Virusampatti, Vilathikulam Taluk,
Thoothukudi District. .. Petitioner/Respondent
Vs.
1.M.Valli .. 1st Respondent/Appellant
2.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
O/o. Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District. .. 2nd Respondent/
Respondent
___________
Page 1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
C.R.P.(MD) No.2242 of 2022
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India praying to
set aside the judgment and decree passed in C.M.A.(CS) No.20 of 2011 by
the Cooperative Tribunal and Principal District Judge, Thoothukudi.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
For Respondents : Mr.S.Mohan Dass – for R1
: No appearance – for R2
ORDER
This civil revision petition has been filed against an order dated
02.11.2012 in C.M.A.(CS) No.20 of 2011, passed by the learned Cooperative
Tribunal and Principal District Court, Thoothukudi, setting aside the orders
passed under Section 87 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983
(hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) bearing S.C.No.2/10-11, dated
17.03.2011.
2. Through the said proceedings dated 17.03.2011, Respondent No.
1 herein was required to pay an amount of Rs.6,24,596.40 paise with interest
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
at the rate of 15% till the date of realisation on the ground that Respondent
No.1 being the legal representative of her deceased husband is liable to pay
the said amount having succeeded to the estate of her deceased husband in
terms of Section 87 of the Act. The husband of Respondent No.1 viz., Thiru
V.Murugaiah worked as Secretary in the petitioner-Society from 01.04.2007
to 31.08.2009 and during the said period, he alleged to have committed
certain irregularities and in view of the same, an enquiry under Section 81 of
the Act was ordered which recommended for initiation of surcharge
proceedings under Section 87 of the Act through report dated 12.09.2010.
However, in the meanwhile, the husband of Respondent No.1 died on
05.03.2009. In view of the same, the Enquiry Officer recommended for
initiation of surcharge proceedings against Respondent No.1 herein.
Accordingly, Respondent No.1 was made liable for an amount of Rs.
6,24,596.40 paise through proceedings dated 17.03.2011.
3. Aggrieved by the said proceedings, Respondent No.1 filed
C.M.A.(CS) No.20 of 2011 before the Cooperative Tribunal cum Principal
District Judge, Thoothukudi. The said appeal was allowed by the learned
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
Tribunal by order dated 02.11.2012 holding that the petitioner-Society herein
can proceed against the legal representative of the deceased Secretary, that is
Respondent No.1 herein only in case if Respondent No.1 herein succeeded to
the estate of her deceased husband. But no material is brought on record to
establish that Respondent No.1 herein has inherited any estate of her
deceased husband. The learned Tribunal has also taken note of the contention
raised by the petitioner herein contending that Respondent No.1 herein has
received certain amounts from the Life Insurance Corporation of India on the
demise of her husband and the petitioner-Society has paid premiums in
respect of the said policies and therefore, Respondent No.1 is bound to be
treated as the one succeeded to the estate of her deceased husband. The
learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the petitioner herein failed to
substantiate the contention that Respondent No.1 succeeding to the estate of
her deceased husband.
4. The learned Tribunal having appreciated the matter on factual
aspects basing upon the evidence available before it, came to the conclusion
that the petitioner herein failed to establish conclusively that Respondent No.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
1 herein inherited to the estate of her deceased husband. Thus, having arrived
at such conclusion, the learned Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by
Respondent No.1 herein.
5. Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner strenuously contended that the petitioner-Society as a matter of
fact, paid premiums for the LIC policies obtained in the name of the husband
of Respondent No.1 and the said policies were handed over to Respondent
No.1 after the demise of her husband and accordingly, Respondent No.1
herein received the death claim amounts in respect of the said policies and
therefore, Respondent No.1 herein is liable for the misleads/misappropriate
committed by her deceased husband in terms of Section 87 of the Act.
6. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the entire material on
record.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
7. No doubt, the petitioner has placed some material in support of
its contention that Respondent No.1 herein has succeeded to the estate of her
deceased husband to some extent. But the said material is not placed either
during the surcharge proceedings under Section 87 of the Act or before the
learned Cooperative Tribunal. For the first time, such material is placed
before this Court.
8. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1 seriously
disputed about the documents relied upon by the petitioner before this Court.
The said material is sought to be relied upon for the first time before this
Court in a civil revision petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India.
9. The scope of interference under Article 227 of the Constitution is
very limited and it is only in case of procedural irregularity or failure on the
part of the subordinate judiciary, in the matter of administration of justice
etc., only, this Court would interfere, but not in a routine manner. Admittedly,
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
no material is placed either during the surcharge proceedings or before the
learned Cooperative Tribunal to substantiate the contention of the petitioner
that Respondent No.1 has succeeded to the estate of her deceased husband.
When no such material was placed before the learned Tribunal, the learned
Tribunal cannot be found fault for arriving at the conclusion as noted herein
above. Further, the petitioner is also not in a position to state as to what are
the amounts that were received by Respondent No.1 herein after the demise
of her husband and when such amounts were received. In the absence of any
such positive asertion on the part of the petitioner herein, this Court is unable
to accept the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
10. A perusal of the order passed by the learned Cooperative
Tribunal dated 02.11.2012 makes it clear that the learned Tribunal has gone
deep into the matter and thoroughly considered all the contentions raised by
either side and arrived at right conclusion based on the material before it and
there is nothing for this Court to find fault with the order under revision.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
11. Accordingly, this Civil Revision Petition is dismissed. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
04.03.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
ABR
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
To
1.The Cooperative Tribunal and Principal District Judge,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
O/o. Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies,
Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.
ABR
04.03.2025
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/03/2025 06:19:52 pm )
