V. Rethinam v. The Manager,

ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reports no instructions.

¶2The petitioner purchased gingelly seeds and kept the same with the first respondent and obtained receipt. Based on the same, the petitioner borrowed loan from the second respondent to the tune of Rs.12,00,000/-. It is known as ware house receipt loan. The market rate fell drastically. The second respondent demanded a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- as margin money. The petitioner could not comply with the same. Hence, the impugned auction sale notice was issued. It is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶3The issue is covered duly by the contractual terms and conditions. The question of writ Court interfering in this matter does not arise at all.

¶4The Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

16.08.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No rmi

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. rmi

16.08.2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.08.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and M.P.(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2015 V.Rethinam ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Manager, Tamil Nadu Ware Housing Corporation Aranthangi Ware House, Opp to Railway Station, Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District. 2.The Authorised Officer, IDBI Bank, Aranthangi Branch, Pudukottai District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned auction notice dated 29.10.2015 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mrs.Porkodi Karnan For Respondents : No appearance