Allowed

Maragatham P v. the Senior Regional Manager

Madras HC2 Mar 2022WP(MD)/3498/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition by directing the 2nd respondent, TASMAC, to vacate a specific shop premise in Madurai belonging to the petitioner within 30 days and pay compensation for rent.

What did the court decide?

The respondents were directed to vacate the shop within 30 days and pay compensation for use and occupation beyond 26.07.2021.

Maragatham P Vs the Senior Regional Manager — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.3498 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 02.03.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.3498 of 2022

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P.(MD) No.3069 of 2022

¶9

P.Maragatham ... Petitioner

¶10

/vs./

¶11

1.The Senior Regional Manager,

¶12

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (TASMAC),

¶13

Madurai.

¶14

2.The District Manager,

¶15

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (TASMAC),

¶16

Madurai. ... Respondents

¶17

PRAYER:

¶18

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to vacate the TASMAC Shop No.5151 from the building bearing door no.146, Puttu Thoppu Main Road, Madurai belongs to the petitioner based on the communication dated 26.07.2021 sent by the 2^nd respondent within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶19

For Petitioners : Mr.B.Jeyakumar

¶20

For Respondents : Mr.H.Arumugam Standing Counsel

¶21

ORDER

¶22

After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 2nd respondent/TASMAC to vacate the premises in terms of the letter dated 26.07.2021, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the 2nd respondent shall pay the amount towards https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶23

1/2

¶24

W.P.(MD) No.3498 of 2022

¶25

compensation to the petitioner by paying appropriate rent for use and occupation of the property beyond 26.07.2021. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/Assistant Registrar (AD-I)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

Mm TO 1.The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (TASMAC), Madurai. 2.The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., (TASMAC), Madurai. +1 CC to M/s.H.ARUMUGAM, Advocate ( SR-9911[F] dated 03/03/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.B.JEYAKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-9947[F] dated 04/03/2022 ) W.P.(MD)No.3498 of 2022

¶29

02.03.2022

¶30

KG(CO) KB(21.03.2022) 2P 5C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

Maragatham P v. the Senior Regional Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maragatham P v. the Senior Regional Manager

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

Sundar Tharmalingam Vs the Tamil Nadu State Marketing

Ramalingam T Vs the Commissioner

Kasthuri Vs the District Collector

M.a.S.E.Nasar Vs The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board

M/S.Matha Wood Industries Vs the Commissioner of Customs

Perumalsamy (M/59/19) Vs the Commissioner