Partly allowed

K.R. Saravanan v. the Joint Commissioner

Madras HC3 Mar 2022WP(MD)/3885/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged the sealing of a shop and failure to de-seal it despite paying rent, while disputing arrears calculations. The Court directed payment of arrears to allow immediate de-sealing and permitted a representation on further rent enhancement.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay Rs. 2,02,460 arrears within 15 days to enable immediate de-sealing of the shop; liberty to file representation on rent enhancement.

K.R. Saravanan Vs the Joint Commissioner — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD).No.3885 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 03.03.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P(MD).No.3885 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD).No. 3351 of 2022

¶7

K.R.Saravanan ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

1.The Joint Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Ellis Nagar, Maduai.

¶9

2.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple, Madurai.

¶10

3.The Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Ellis Nagar, Madurai. ...Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2&3 to open/de-seal the shop bearing Door.No.146, East Masi Street, Madurai, Sealed on 24.02.2022 in colorable exercise of power, arbitrary manner and continue to receive rent at the rate of Rs.12,300/- pending disposal of the appeal in A.P.No.19 of 2020 on the file of the Commissioner, HR&CE, Chennai.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.R.G.Shankar Ganesh For R1 & R3 : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader For R2 : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Commissioner in A.P.No.19 of 2020, pursuant to an order of this Court in W.P.(MD). No.26078 of 2019, dated 10.12.2019. As per the aforesaid order, the petitioner was directed to pay 50% of the enhanced rent, which the petitioner was in arrear at the time of filing the writ petition and the petitioner was to continue to pay the revised rent of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

1/3

¶16

W.P(MD).No.3885 of 2022

¶17

Rs.12,300/- pending such appeal.

¶18

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- on 23.12.2019 in compliance of the aforesaid order of this Court and had also continued to pay the revised rent of Rs.12,300/-. It is further submitted that due to the out break of Covid-19 Pandemic, the petitioner had suffered a loss and therefore the petitioner fell in arrears. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was in arrears of Rs.3,19,000/-. The respondents, on the other hand, would submit that the petitioner was in arrears of Rs.2,02,460/- towards the arrears of the enhanced rent of Rs.12,300/- and that the petitioner was in further arrears of sum of Rs.86,400/- on the further enhancement made, which has been communicated to the petitioner and payable by the petitioner from July 2019.

¶19

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will pay the arrears of Rs.2,02,460/- and give appropriate explanation as to why the revised rent of Rs.15,000/could not be imposed on the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the fact that the petitioner may have indeed suffered loss, I am inclined to dispose this writ petition by directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.2,02,460/- towards the arrears of enhanced rent of Rs.12,300/- within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondents shall de-seal the shop immediately on receipt of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner fails to remit the aforesaid amount within the specified period above, the respondents are at liberty to re-seal the shop again. The petitioner is also given liberty to give proper representation in writing regarding the enhancement of rent to Rs.15,000/-. The respondents shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a reasonable period. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

// True Copy //

¶23

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶24

¶25

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

¶26

2/3

¶27

W.P(MD).No.3885 of 2022

¶28

¶29

1.The Joint Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Ellis Nagar, Maduai. 2.The Joint Commissioner/Executive Officer, Arulmigu Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple, Madurai. 3.The Assistant Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Ellis Nagar, Madurai. +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-10173[F] dated 04/03/2022 ) W.P(MD).No.3885 of 2022 03.03.2022 IMS(CO) KB(17.03.2022) 3P 5C

¶30

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

¶31

3/3

K.R. Saravanan v. the Joint Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.R. Saravanan v. the Joint 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

Maragatham P Vs the Senior Regional Manager

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

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

Dhanasekharan Vs the Joint Commissioner

Tvl. Sri Amman Metal Works Vs the State Tax Officer

Jayaraman.M Vs the Commissioner