Andrew Yule and Company Limited represented by its Deputy General Manager and others vs The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, and others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2005 Supreme(Mad) 492

PRABHA SRIDEVAN
Andrew Yule and Company Limited represented by its Deputy General Manager and others – Appellant
Versus
The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, and others – Respondent

Advocates:
G. Masilamani, Senior Counsel, for M/s.King and Patridge for Petitioners in W.Ps.No.39649 of 2002 and 27303 of 2004.
Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam, for Petitioners in W.P.No.17736 of 2004.
A.J.Jawad, for Petitioners in W.P.No.20357 of 2004.
T.V.Ramanujam, Senior Counsel, for M.S.Mani, (For Respondent No.2 in W.Ps.No.39649 of 2002,) 20357 and 17736 of 2004 and Respondents Nos.3 and 4 in W.P.No.27303 of 2003.
S.Venkatesan, for Respondent No.2 W.P.No. 27303 of 2003.

ORDER: The challenge in all these writ petitions is made by the persons in possession of the property which is the subject matter of the Sale Certificate dated 9.8.2002, claiming to be the tenants of the said property. The Sale Certificate dated 9.8.2002 reads as follows:

"This is to certify that M/s.A.R.Housing Private Limited. has been declared the purchaser through a sale by public auction held on 29.8.2001 of the under-mentioned immovable property. The property described is situated in T.S.No.11, Urur Village, Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk, Chennai District."

Pursuant to this sale certificate, the Recovery Officer issued several letters to the petitioner herein calling upon them either to "hand over vacant possession of the property" or informing the petitioners that if vacant possession is not handed over, they would be "evicted from the premises forcibly...".

2. Mr.G.Masilamani, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.Nos. 39649 of 2002 and 27303 of 2003 and Mr.Abudu Kumar Rajaratnam as well as Mr. A.J.Jawad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners in W.P. Nos.17736 and 20357 of 2004 respectively, submitted that the aforesaid order is liable to b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2005 Supreme(Mad) 492

PRABHA SRIDEVANAndrew Yule and Company Limited represented by its Deputy General Manager and others – AppellantVersusThe Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, and others – Respondent

Cases Referred (12)

PRABHA SRIDEVAN
Andrew Yule and Company Limited represented by its Deputy General Manager and others – Appellant
Versus
The Recovery Officer, Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, Chennai, and others – Respondent