Dismissed

Sigamani v. the District Collector

Madras HC28 Mar 2022WP/20983/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition challenging the enhancement of fair rent was dismissed. The court held that after accepting a mutually agreed rent upon re-induction, the petitioner could not later claim the rent was high. The petitioner was directed to pay arrears in six installments.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay all arrears of rentals as per the admitted licensee in six equal monthly installments within six months.

Sigamani Vs the District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 28.03.2022

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶5

W.P.NO.20983 OF 2011 AND M.P.NO.2 OF 2011

¶6

Sigamani ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The District Collector, Dharmapuri District. Dharmapuri.

¶9

2.Project Officer cum Member Secretary, Dharmapuri District Socio Economic Development Society, Dharmapuri. ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records in impugned order dated 28.02.2011 bearing ref No:200/09/R-13, quashing the Demand of rent by 2^nd respondent.

¶11

For Petitioner : M/s.K.N.Shanthi For Respondents : Mr.T.Venkatesh Kumar Special Government Pleader [R1] Mr.Jayaprakash Narayanan [R2]

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The writ petitioner in this writ petition is a licensee of the shop portion allotted by the second respondent. The petitioner was asked to vacate the building for the purpose of renovation. He immediately approached this Court and the Hon'ble First Division Bench of this Court, in W.A.Nos.698 to 700 & 973 to 975 of 2009, by order dated 13.07.2009, directed the petitioner to vacate and hand-over the possession for renovation work, with a right to get re-possession of the building, on completion of renovation, provided, till the license is subsisting.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

As per the directions of the Hon'ble Division Bench, the petitioner was re-inducted on a fair rent mutually accepted by both the parties. After renovation, the petitioner made a request for reduction of rent to 20% enhancement but that was not considered to and notice of eviction was issued to the petitioner. Challenging the fixation of fair rent, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶16

Heard the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

¶17

On perusal of the materials placed before this Court, it is noted that the petitioner was re-inducted into the renovated shop on the basis of the admitted rent. Once the rent was fixed after negotiations between the parties and it is also accepted by the licensee, he cannot turn around and say that it is on the higher side. Licensee should have taken a decision either to accept the rent and enter into possession of renewed rent or contested the enhancement before entering into possession of the new shop. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the rent is on a higher side, after accepting the offer, is not correct and unsustainable and therefore, the Writ Petition cannot be considered.

¶18

In the result, the Writ Petition stands disposed of and the petitioner shall pay all the arrears of rentals as per the admitted licensee. As requested by Ms.K.N.Shanthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, six months time is granted for payment of arrears, in six equal monthly installments. In case of default, it is open to the respondent to take action against the petitioner. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶20

// True Copy //

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

Sni

¶23

¶24

1.The District Collector, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri.

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶26

2.Project Officer cum Member Secretary, Dharmapuri District Socio Economic Development Society, Dharmapuri.

¶27

+1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.No.21079, 21054

¶28

+1cc to M/s.K.N.Shanthi, Advocate Sr.No.20968

¶29

+1cc to Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Sr.No.20941

¶30

W.P.No.20983 of 2011

¶31

RGH(CO) RVM(30/06/2022)

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Sigamani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sigamani v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Suresh Babu, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

K.Gonvindarajulu Vs the Governor

Seethapathi Vs The Junior Engineert.

M.S.Chandrasekaran Vs the Principal Commissioner and

Vettri Selvan Vs the District Collector

Subramani Chettiar Vs the District Collector