Venkateshan v. The Authorized Officer

ORDER [Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble CHIEF JUSTICE] We have heard Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Thevan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent bank.

¶2The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent bank submits that the sale could not take place and as such, the sale proceedings stood cancelled.

¶3In light of that, the purpose of the writ petition now does not survive. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

(S.V.G., CJ.) (C.K., J.)

31.08.2023 NCC :Yes/No Index : Yes/No PM W.P(MD)No.11017oofo2023 THEoHON'BLEoCHIEFoJUSTICE ando C.KUMARAPPAN,oJ. PM W.P.(MD)No.11017oofo2023

31.08.2023 Pageg4gofg4

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 31.08.2023 CORAM : THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND The HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P(MD)Nos.9650 & 9654 of 2023 Venkateshan ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Authorized Officer, South Indian Bank, Madurai Regional Office, 1st Floor, YMCA Building, 70 Feet Road, Ellis Nagar, Madurai – 625 016. 2.The Branch Manager, South Indian Bank, Rajapalayam Branch, Door No.474, 476, & 477, Opp. Chitra Hospitals, Thenkasi Road, Rajapalayam – 626 117, Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned sale auction notice passed by the first respondent bank dated 11.04.2023 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the first respondent bank to regularize the loan account of the petitioner within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan For Respondents : Mr.Thevan, Standing Counsel