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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 80791

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice P. VELMURUGAN
MR.N.NARAYANAN, – Appellant
Versus
N.Hariharamuthu – Respondent
CS/112/2020



1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

(ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION)

THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL 2022

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. VELMURUGAN

C.S.No. 112 of 2020

and

A.No. 508 of 2021

C.S.No. 112 of 2020 :-

* Mr. N. Narayanan,

Elected State President Representing

Tamilnadu Brahmin Association (THAMBRAAS),

Having office at Flat No.6, 1st Floor,

Vishwakamal, New No.62,

R.K. Mutt Road, Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.

... Plaintiff

*(Amended as per order dated 01/02/2022 in

Application No. 3363/2021)

-Vs-

1. Mr. N. Hariharamuthu,

S/o. Mr. Narayana Iyer,

5/1, 3rd Cross Street,

Anna Nagar, Palani,

Pin Code : 624 601.

2. INDIAN BANK,

Abiramapuram Branch,

Represented by its Branch Manager,

No.63, C.P. Ramasamy Road,

Abiramapuram,

Chennai – 600 018.

... Defendants

2

Civil Suit praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to

a) Declaration that the letter dated 03/09/2019 issued by the 2nd

Defendant at the instance of the 1st Defendant is not binding on the

Plaintiffs.

b) Directing the 1st and 2nd Defendants jointly and severally to pay

Damages of Rs.1,10,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Ten Lakhs only) for the

loss of reputation and defamation.

c) Mandatory injunction directing the 2nd Defendant Bank to permit

the Plaintiffs to have their accounts with the 2nd Defendant transferred to

some other Bank.

d) Cost of the suit.

A.No. 508 of 2021 :-

Mr. N. Hariharamuthu,

S/o. Mr. Narayana Iyer,

5/1, 3rd Cross Street,

Anna Nagar, Palani,

Pin Code : 624 601.

Applicant/1st Defendant

-Vs-

1. Thamizhnadu Brahmin Association (THAMBRAAS),

Represented by its State President Mr.N.Narayanan,

Having Office at Flat No.6, 1st Floor,

Vishwakamal, New No.62,

R.K. Mutt Road,

Mylapore,

Chennai – 600 004.

... 1st Respondent/Plaintiff

3

2. INDIAN BANK,

Abiramapuram Branch,

Represented by its Branch Manager,

No.63, C.P. Ramasamy Road,

Abiramapuram, Chennai – 600 018.

... 2nd Respondent/2nd Defendant

Application praying that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to reject the

plaint and consequently dismiss the suit.

This Civil Suit along with the application coming on this day before

this Court for hearing in the presence of Mr. G. Nanmaran, Advocate for the

plaintiff in C.S.No. 112 of 2020 and for the 1st respondent in A.No. 508 of

2021 and Mr. Muthucharan Sundresh, Advocate for the 1st defendant in

C.S.No.112 of 2020 and for the applicant in A.No. 508 of 2021 and

Mr.R.Ramesh, advocate for the 2nd defendant in C.S.No. 112 of 2020 and

for the 2nd respondent in A.No. 508 of 2021 and upon reading the plaint

filed in C.S.No.112 of 2020 and the Judges Summons and the affidavit of

N.Hariharamuthu, filed in A.No. 508 of 2021 and this Court having

observed that the Suit is not maintainable on the original side jurisdiction of

this Court for the simple reason that the damages appears to have been

claimed for a sum of Rs.1,10,00,000/- and deliberately designed the cause

of action so as to bring the same within the jurisdiction of this Court, further

this Court finds that there is no shred of averments in support of the

damages but it is a clear ploy to bring this case within original side

4

jurisdiction of this Court, clever drafting of plaint will not give any right to

the plaintiff, further, the association is an unregistered body and therefore

the, first respondent/plaintiff cannot file this Suit as it is violative of Section

4 of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, further, as per By-

Law Article 271 of the association, the association should have been

registered, but for the dereliction of statutory duty by the first

respondent/Plaintiff, elected State President, the said association continues

to remain an unregistered body, and this Court is of the view that the Suit is

barred by law and hence, the Suit is not maintainable, and

it is ordered as follows :-

That the Suit in C.S.No. 112 of 2020 be and is hereby rejected.

2. That the connected appli

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top