C.R.P.(MD)No.1281 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 17.05.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

C.R.P.(MD)No.1281 of 2023

and

C.M.P(MD)No.6302 of 2023

T.Vijayakumar

: Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Branch Manager,

Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank Limited,

S.No.424/6B, Marthandam Highway Road,

Karungal,

Kanyakumari District – 629 157.

2.The District Judge,

Nagercoil,

Kanyakumari District.

: Respondents

PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India to direct the District Judge, Kanyakumari at Nagercoil

to number and take the case on file the PCEIOP Filing No.OP/395/2023 on

the file of the District Judge, Nagercoil and dispose of the same on merit

and in accordance with law.

1/18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(MD)No.1281 of 2023

For Petitioner

: Mr.Vijay Satya for

Mr.S.Titus

For Respondent-1

: Mr.N.Dilipkumar

ORDER

This Civil Revision Petition has been preferred as against the return

of PCEIOP Filing No.OP/395/2023 in the Vacation District Court,

Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil and directing the second respondent to

number the PCEIOP Filing No.OP/395/2023 and dispose of the same on

merit and in accordance with law.

2. Mr.Vijay Satya, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that numbering any petition is only a ministerial Act and hence, denial of

numbering any petition would amount to denial of justice.

3. Mr.N.Dilipkumar, learned counsel for the first respondent/bank

would submit that already two writ petitions viz., W.P(MD)No.20994 of

2022 and W.P(MD)No.28268 of 2022 and one miscellaneous petition viz.,

2/18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(MD)No.1281 of 2023

WMP(MD)No.7466 of 2023 have been preferred by the same petitioner

before the Division Bench of this Court in respect of the same subject

matter and the same were dismissed and hence, the Civil Revision Petition

is liable to be dismissed in view of the dismissal of those writ petitions. He

would further submit that the petitioner had failed to comply with the

conditional order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. On

his failure to comply with the conditional order, those writ petitions came to

be dismissed. He would further submit that for the scheduled bank,

particularly, for the first respondent/ scheduled bank, the provision of the

Tamil Nadu Money Lenders Act and also Tamil Nadu Prohibition of

Charging Exorbitant Interest Act will not be applicable.

4. I have considered the rival submissions of both the learned

counsels and perused the materials available on records carefully.

5. A perusal of the records would clearly show that PCEIOP Filing

No.OP/395/2023 is an unnumbered O.P of the year 2023. It was submitted

on 17.04.2023 and the same was returned on 25.04.2023, for four reasons.

3/18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.R.P.(MD)No.1281 of 2023

Thereafter, those defects were rectified and resubmitted on 03.05.2023.

However, the learned District Judge had returned the file for the reason that

previous return still holds good and the petitioner has not explained the

reasons properly. As per document No.6, the petitioner himself had

admitted the due amount and filed an undertaking affidavit before the

Hon'ble High Court. On that ground alone, now the return has been made

granting one month time.

6. There is an inherent right in every person to bring suit of a civil

nature. A suit for its maintainability requires no authority of law and it is

enough that no statute bars the suit. The process of converting a plaint into

a suit is fundamentally a part of the administrative or ministerial act of the

Court, as dictated by the procedural law. No adjudication is involved, nor

should it be involved when a plaint is presented at the point of entry into the

legal system. Hence, during scrutiny of plaints for registration, t