COMMON ORDER

Since the issue involved in all these Civil Revision Petitions is one and the same, they are disposed of by this common order.

2.The Revision Petitioners herein had availed housing loans from the respondent Society. Mortgages were created on the petitioners' petition-mentioned properties. To deposit the amount due on the mortgages, the petitioners filed petitions under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act,1882 before the District Munsif Court, Eraniel. The Court below returned the same on the ground of maintainability. Challenging the same, these Civil Revision Petitions have been filed.

3.It is not in dispute that the respondent is a Society registered under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983. The petitioners are its members. Dispute has arisen between the petitioners on the one hand and the management of the Society on the other. Any dispute touching the business of a registered Society arising between a member and the Society shall be referred to the Registrar for decision under Section 90 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983.

4.The question that arises for consideration is whether a member of the Society can file a petition under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Section 83 of the Act reads as under :

“83.Power to deposit in Court money due on mortgage.—At any time after the principal money [payable in respect of any mortgage has become due] and before a suit for redemption of the mortgaged property is barred, the mortgagor, or any other person entitled to institute such suit, may deposit, in any Court in which he might have instituted such suit, to the account of the mortgagee, the amount remaining due on the mortgage.

Right to money deposited by mortgagor.

—The Court shall thereupon cause written notice of the deposit to be served on the mortgagee, and the mortgagee may, on presenting a petition (verified in manner prescribed by law for the verification of plaints) stating the amount then due on the mortgage, and his willingness to accept the money so deposited in full discharge of such amount, and- on depositing in the same Court the mortgage- deed 6 [and all documents in his possession or power relating to the mortgaged property], apply for and receive the money, and the mortgage- deed, [and all such other documents], so deposited hail be delivered to the mortgagor or such other person as aforesaid.

[Where the mortgagee is in possession of the mortgaged. property, the Court shall, before paying to him the amount so deposited direct him to deliver possession thereof to the mortgagor and at the cost of the mortgagor either to re-transfer the mortgaged property to the mortgagor or to such third person as the mortgagor may direct or to execute and (where the mortgage has been effected by a registered instrument) have registered an acknowledgment in writing that any right in derogation of the mortgagor's interest transferred to the mortgagee has been extinguished.”

The nature of proceedings under the said provision has been dealt with in Bishwanath Prasad Singh v. Rajendra Prasad (2006) 4 SCC 432. It was held that the provision merely permits the mortgagor to deposit the mortgage amount. Even in a case where such deposit is made, in the event the mortgagee refused to accept the deposit, the mortgagor would have no option but to institute a suit for redemption relying on the mortgage money deposited. By reason of such deposit, the status of the parties is not altered. For filing a suit for redemption by the mortgagor, deposit under Section 83 is not a pre-condition. The function of the Court in terms of Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act is procedural in nature. The court cannot even go into the question of correctness of the amount deposited. The outcome of the proceedings under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act cannot operate as res judicata. After so holding, it was laid down that the deposit under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act has to be ma