Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Mrs Caroline Prabha vs The Authorised Officer And Others

Madras High Court|06 January, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06.01.2017 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ W.P.No.44736 of 2016 and WMP No.38554 of 2016 Mrs.Caroline Prabha .. Petitioner versus
1. The Authorised Officer, Bank of India, Star House, 3rd Floor, 324, Oppanakkara Street, Tiruppur.
2. Bank of India, rep. by its Manager, Ganapathipalayam Branch, Tiruppur.
3. K.Thirumurthy
4. The Registrar, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Coimbatore .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents 1 and 2 from demolishing the petitioner's residential building in SF.No.593 and 594/2, Sri.R.R.Iswaraya Nagar, Thottipalayam Village, Tiruppur, Tiruppur Taluk, Annanagar Extension until disposal of the appeal in S.A.No.139 of 2014 filed by the petitioner under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the 4th respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Jermiah For Respondents : Mr.Benjamin George
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.MANIKUMAR, J.) Borrower has filed the instant writ petition for a writ of mandamus forbearing respondents 1 and 2 from demolishing his residential building in SF.No.593 and 594/2, Sri.R.R.Iswaraya Nagar, Thottipalayam Village, Tiruppur, Tiruppur Taluk, Annanagar Extension, until disposal of the appeal in S.A.No.139 of 2014 filed by him under Section 17 of the SARFAESI Act before the 4th respondent.
2. When the matter came up on 04.01.2017, we directed Mr.Benjamin George, learned counsel for Bank of India, Tiruppur, present in Court, to take notice and directed the Registry to post the matter on 06.01.2017 and thus, it is listed today.
3. Reverting, Bank has filed a counter affidavit alongwith the typed set of papers stating that the writ petitioner has suppressed the filing of earlier writ petitions and the orders passed thereon,
4. Going on through the same, Mr.Jermiah, learned counsel representing the counsel on record, does not dispute the same. However, he seeks permission to withdraw the instant writ petition. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.
5. Placing on record the above, permission is granted. Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No leave is granted to file a fresh writ petition on any of the grounds averred in the present writ petition. No Costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.M.K., J.] [M.G.R., J.] 06.01.2017 Index: Yes/No. Internet: Yes ars
S. MANIKUMAR, J.
AND M.GOVINDARAJ, J.
ars W.P.No.44736 of 2016 and WMP No.38554 of 2016 06.01.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Mrs Caroline Prabha vs The Authorised Officer And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
06 January, 2017
Judges
  • S Manikumar
  • M Govindaraj