Dismissed

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust v. the Commissioner

Madras HC15 Apr 2021WP(MD)/351/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by the Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust seeking removal of encroachments by the third respondent over a property. The Court observed that revenue records show the property remains with the Temple, directing the petitioner to approach the second respondent with documentary proof to settle title. Dismissed. No costs.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no costs. The petitioner was directed to approach the second respondent with documentary proof to establish title.

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust Vs the Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.351 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 15.04.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.351 of 2021

¶7

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust represented by its President Mr.O.T.S.Ethirajalu Choudri S/o.O.T.Seenivasan Thiruthangal Residing at No.2/73-2, Nadutheru Meesalur Post Virudhunagar-626 023 Virudhunagar District ... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

1.The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road Nungambakkam, Chennai-34 2.The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department Sivagangai, Sivagangai District 3.The Executive Officer Sri Nindra Narayana Perumal Temple Thiruthangal, Virudhunagar District ... Respondents

¶10

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to remove the encroachment over the Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust property consisting of Door No.48, 49 and 50 in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Survey No.1204 situated at Agrahara Street, Thiruthangal Town,

¶11

1/3

¶12

W.P.(MD) No.351 of 2021

¶13

Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, made by the third respondent by considering petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2020.

¶14

For Petitioner :Mr.Ramasamy.S.

¶15

For Respondents :Mr.K.P.Narayana Kumar

¶16

Special Government Pleader for R1 & R2 Mr.P.Mahendran Standing Counsel for R3

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

[Order of the Court was made by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]

¶19

This writ petition seeks for a direction upon the respondents 1 and 2 to remove the encroachments made over Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust's property bearing Door Nos.48, 49 and 50, comprised in Survey No.1204, situated at Agrahara Street, Thiruthangal Town, Sivakasi Taluk, Virudhunagar District, by the third respondent, by considering petitioner's representation dated 11.11.2020.

¶20

2. The petitioner – Trust claims that the property in question is a Trust property and the Executive Officer of Sri Nindra Narayana Perumal Temple, Thiruthangal, Virudhunagar District / third respondent has put up fensing around the property and put some flower pots. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to certain communications between the then Executive Officer of the Temple and the Trust asking them to demolish the existing dilapidated construction by themselves or handover the same to the Temple Authorities. This, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, would amount to recognizing the petitioner's entitlement to the property in question.

¶21

3. We have heard Mr.P.Mahendran, learned Standing Counsel for the third respondent, who has filed a detailed counter affidavit and photographs.

¶22

4. The property in question is adjacent to the Temple and from the records placed before this Court, we find that there is no document of title vesting the property in question in favour of the petitioner – Trust. That apart, in the revenue records, the property in question continues to remain in the name of the Temple. Therefore, if at all the petitioner claims any right over the property in question, he has to establish the same in the manner known to law and not by way of a writ of mandamus. Hence, the prayer sought for in this writ petition is dismissed.

¶23

5. However, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶24

2/3

¶25

W.P.(MD) No.351 of 2021

¶26

Department / second respondent herein with a representation duly supported by documents showing that the property in question was lawfully entrusted with the petitioner – Trust and if such a representation is given with adequate documentary proof, then alone, the second respondent shall consider the same after hearing the Executive Officer of the Temple and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

¶27

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar (CO)

¶30

// True Copy //

¶31

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶32

Note :

¶33

In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned. krk To:

¶34

1.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-34.

¶35

2.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Sivagangai, Sivagangai District.

¶36

+1 CC to M/s.P.MAHENDRAN, Advocate ( SR-15942[F] dated 16/04/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-16307[F] dated 17/04/2021 )

¶37

W.P.(MD) No.351 of 2021 15.04.2021

¶38

GS (28.04.2021) 3P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶39

3/3

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Manavala Mamunigal Trust v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Dhanalakshmi, Vs the District Collector / Inspector of Panchayat

Alagappan Vs the District Collector

Bharathidasan, Vs Karur Sri Ramakrishna Educational and Charitable Trust

A.Chandrasekaran, Vs the District Collector

The Managing Director Vs J. Lidwin Jeyanthirani

Shanmugavalli.P Vs The Accountant General (a and E)