SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 65261

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Anita Sumanth, C.Kumarappan, JJ
S.Jayakumar – Appellant
Versus
1.The Authorized Officer, Tamil Nadu Grama Bank – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.25441 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.L.Prabahar
For the Respondents: Mr.M.Thirunavukkarasu

The court emphasized the necessity for banks to act expeditiously in processing possession requests post-auction.

Headnote:The case concerns a writ petition under Article 226 for a Writ of Mandamus regarding the possession of land purchased by the petitioner in an auction. The petitioner, having paid the required amount, contends possession has not been delivered despite sale confirmation. The Court found grievances justified due to the Bank's delay in processing. The Court directed a timely resolution and awarded costs to the petitioner for the delay. The final determination resulted in the petition being allowed.

Table of Content
1. purchase and possession of property in auction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. bank's approach to legal processes. (Para 3)
3. court's observations on delays. (Para 4 , 5)
4. directions for timely action. (Para 6)

(Order of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

The petitioner has admittedly purchased the property admeasuring 1 acre 11 cents at S.No.385, Ottudanpatti Village, Kovilpati Taluk, Thoothukudi District (land in question) in the e-auction held on

25.07.2024.

2.According to the petitioner, he was declared as a highest bidder and also paid a sum of Rs.30,46,000/-. Sale is confirmed, and sale certificate issued on 22.11.2024 registered on the file of the Sub Registrar, Kadambur vide document No.1886/2024. He is aggrieved by the fact that he has not yet been given possession of the land. He has also made a representation on 23.06.2025 before the authorities in this regard.

3.Mr.Thirunavukarasu, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the Tamil Nadu Grama Bank /R1 to R3, states that the bank has approached the Chief Judicial Magistrate by way of an application under Section 14(1) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act)

and the same is in process of the being numbered.

4.The bank is certainly remiss as their application has been moved before the Chief Judicial Magistrate only on 27.07.2025, nearly one year after the purchase of the property by the petitioner. We hence, agree with the grievances expressed by the petitioner.

5.Faced with this position, Mr.Thirunavukarasu, learned counsel undertakes to permit the petitioner to cultivate the land after obtaining necessary order from the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

6.There is a direction to the Bank to number the application expeditiously and bring the same up for hearing and obtain orders within a period of four weeks from today (12.11.2025). The Bank will also remit costs of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to the petitioner within a period of one week from today for the delay in moving the competent authority to obtain possession of the land in question.

7.This writ petition is allowed. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top