S.Pachainayaki v. Coimbatore.4. Andavar Finance Company
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. The Competent Authority/ The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of Indiapraying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus, as stated therein. For Petitioner :Mr.P.R.BalasubramanianFor Respondents :Mr.V.R.Thangavelu,G.A. (for RR1 to 3 and 5) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDERBy consent…
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 30.06.2008CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A. KULASEKARANW.P. No.15349 of 2008andM.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008S.Pachainayaki .. PetitionerVersus1. State rep. by the Secretary, (Home Department) Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
The Competent Authority, Additional Commissioner for Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
The District Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing II, Coimbatore.
Andavar Finance Company rep. by V.Ramachandran 55, Municipal Office Street, Tiruppur, Coimbatore District.
The Competent Authority/ The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore .. Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of Indiapraying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus, as stated therein. For Petitioner :Mr.P.R.BalasubramanianFor Respondents :Mr.V.R.Thangavelu,G.A. (for RR1 to 3 and 5) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ ORDERBy consent of the learned counsel on either side, this WritPetition is taken up for final disposal.2. Heard both sides. 3. The prayer in the writ petition is for a mandamusdirecting the fifth respondent to disburse the contractual rate ofinterest as per Banker's calculation along with the Principalamount of the petitioner's deposit amount. 4. The petitioner has not produced any evidence to showwhat is the contractual rate of interest or the banker'scalculation. There is an intimation dated 27.03.2008 receivedfrom the Collector stating that the amount payable to thepetitioner and similarly placed persons will be paid along withinterest for 10 years at the rate of 9% per annum.
In the saidcommunication it is also found mentioned that the saiddisbursement is subject to the result of the case pending beforethe Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is also seen from the records thatthe petitioner has sent a representation to the District Collectorseeking higher rate of interest. Now, the writ petition is filedto direct the respondents to pay higher rate of interest. ThisCourt, at this stage, not in a position to grant any relief to thepetitioner as prayed for since the disbursement itself isadmittedly subject to the result of the case before the Hon'bleSupreme Court. As pointed out already, the petitioner has alreadysent his objections to the District Collector. So the furtherpayment if any can be considered by the said authority inaccordance with law after receipt of the final order from thehonourable Supreme Court. It is made clear that if the petitioneris not satisfied with the amount disbursed by the respondents, itis open to her to receive it under protest, if she is so advised.
Operative part
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. Nocosts. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions areclosed.gms Sd/- Assistant Registrar / True Copy / Sub. Assistant Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To1. The Secretary, (Home Department) Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.2. The Competent Authority, Additional Commissioner for Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.3. The District Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing II, Coimbatore.4. The Competent Authority/ The District Revenue Officer, Coimbatore 1 cc to Mr.P.R.Balasubramanian, Advocate, SR.33308/081 cc to the Government Pleader, High Court, Madras, SR.33967/08tm (co)tp/10.7.08W.P. No.15349 of 2008
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.