BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 14.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA and W.M.P(MD)No.3242 of 2025 Ravikumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Joint Registrar/Liquidator, No. 28, Madurai Urban Cooperative Bank (Liquidated ) Ltd., Door No. 32, Naicker New Street, Madurai 625 001.

2. The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Madurai Circle, 2nd Floor TPK Road, Near Palanganatham, Roundana, Madurai 625 003. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the impugned auction sale notice issued by the 2nd respondent in Form No. 8 and Form No. 9 in C.E.P.60/2024-2025/SF dated 09.01.2025.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Kannan For R1 to R2 : Mr.A.Kannan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned auction sale notice issued by the 2^nd respondent dated 09.01.2025.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the subject property bearing Door No.7A belonged to his grand mother Pappammal. The said Pappammal had borrowed a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- from the Madurai Urban Cooperative Bank which has been liquidated and is presently represented by the 1^st respondent. She had mortgaged the subject property by executing a mortgage deed dated 17.09.2001.

3. The petitioner would submit that her grandparents were eking out their livelihood by doing coolie works and running the family with very great difficulty. Initially they were servicing the loan properly by repaying it. Meanwhile on 27.12.2007, the said Pappammal passed away leaving behind her husband namely Kasithevar, the petitioner's father Pandian and her daughter Pasupathi. Thereafter, the said Kasithevar passed away on 03.08.202, leaving behind his son, the petitioner's father Pandian and his daughter Pasupathi as the legal heirs.

4. While so, the petitioner's father Pandian passed away on

01.01.2021, leaving behind him surviving the petitioner, his mother and two other children as his legal heirs. The petitioner's paternal aunt's husband has also passed away and she was living at Nagamalai Pudukottai along with her children in financially strained circumstances.

5. The petitioner would submit that his father was engaged as a lorry driver and therefore, he and his brother Manikandaraja were also carrying on the same business. In the light of the above factors and due to the financial constraints the loan could not be repaid.

6. After the demise of his father in the year 2021, the petitioner and his brothers have been approaching the respondents from the year 2022 requesting them to grant the benefit of waiver of penal interest and other charges and asking for of settlement of loan through the various waiver schemes that had been introduced by the Government of Tamil Nadu.

7. The respondents had agreed to inform the petitioner that as and when the scheme has announced they would keep them informed so as to enable them to avail the benefit. While so, the 2^nd respondent instead of informing them about the scheme has issued an auction Sale Notice dated 09.01.2025, stating that the above mentioned subject property was going on to be brought on public auction on 26.02.2025, for the outstanding amount of Rs.10,88,269/-. The 2^nd respondent has issued this notice without affording an opportunity to the petitioner to settle the loan on the basis of the waiver claim.

8. The petitioner would submit that that thereafter they came to learn that the waiver scheme had been introduced by the Government of Tamil Nadu which is noticed in the proceedings of the Registrar of Cooperative Societies dated 21.12.2023.

9. Under this scheme, the respondents had to calculate the loan amount and the actual amount that is to be paid in accordance with the scheme and send the offer to the borrowers. The borrowers were liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% simple interest from the date of agreement as per the scheme.

10. The scheme provided that