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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 19222

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J
Dr.P.Malliga – Appellant
Versus
1.The District Collector, Trichy – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.K.Suresh
For the Respondents: Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader

The court directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's complaint regarding unauthorized collections post-society registration cancellation.

Headnote:The petitioner's request arises under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, aiming for a Writ of Mandamus to investigate actions against private respondents for continuing collections post cancellation of a Society's registration under Sections 36 and 37 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The Court acknowledged the proceedings and directed respondents 1 to 3 to review the complaint based on legal merits within six weeks. Ultimately, the Writ Petition was disposed of with no costs.

Table of Content
1. petition for writ of mandamus regarding unauthorized collection of funds. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court directive for administrative review of the complaint. (Para 3)

O R D E R

The petitioner is before this Court seeking issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to take action against respondents 4 to 6 on the ground that, despite cancellation of the registration of the Society in question, the said private respondents are continuing to collect money from the flat owners.

2. The petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 36 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, alleging mismanagement and misappropriation by the office bearers of the Society in question. The third respondent, after conducting an enquiry under Section 36 of the Act, passed an order cancelling the registration of the Society under Section 37 of the Act. The grievance of the petitioner is that, despite such cancellation of registration, the said private respondents are continuing to collect money from the flat owners.

3. Mr. P. Subbaraj, learned Special Government Pleader, who accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, on instructions, submitted that the complaint filed by the petitioner will be considered in accordance with law.

The said submission is taken on record. In view of the same, the Writ Petition stands disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to consider the petitioner’s complaint dated 10.01.2026 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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