Disposed

Prakash. v. Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC18 Apr 2022WP(MD)/4088/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the enhancement of rent to Rs.22,500 by a High Court officer, alleging violation of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act. The Single Judge disposed of the petition by directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the claimed arrears to file a statutory appeal; during the appeal pendency, enhanced rent must be paid, and eviction is possible under the Act if the final

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay 50% of arrears to file appeal against enhanced rent; enhanced rent continues to be payable during appeal pendency.

Prakash. v Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.4088 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.04.2022 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN W.P.(MD) No.4088 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.3491 and 3493 of 2022

V.Prakash

... Petitioner

/vs./

1.The State of Tamil Nadu,

¶8

represented by its Secretary to Government,

¶9

Department of Tamil Development and

¶10

Culture and Hindu Religious Endowment Department,

¶11

St.George Fort,

¶12

Chennai 600 009.

¶13

2.The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government,

¶14

Revenue Department,

¶15

St.George Fort,

¶16

Chennai 600 009.

¶17

3.The Commissioner,

¶18

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Nungambakkam High Road,

¶19

Chennai 600 034.

¶20

4.The Joint Commissioner,

¶21

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy, Trichy District.

¶22

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Boologanathaswamy Thirukovil, Keelaransalai, Trichy District.

¶23

... Respondents

¶24

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 4^th respondent vide his proceedings Se.Mu.Pa.Mu.No.1214/2021/E1 dated 08.10.2021 in so far as S.No.28 is concerned and consequential impugned orders passed by the 5^th respondent in his proceedings Nil dated 11.02.2022 and 01.03.2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to constitute the Fair Rent Committee for fixation of fair rent for the occupation of site alone (Floor Rent) strictly in terms of Section 34-A of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶25

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

¶26

1/3

¶27

W.P.(MD) No.4088 of 2022

¶28

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mohamed Suhail for M/S.Ajmal Associates For R1 to R4 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate For R5 : Dr.Ramesh Mahadevan

¶29

ORDER

¶30

The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the enhanced rent of Rs.7,015/- for a shop property measuring 1820 sq.ft.

¶31

2.It is submitted that the enhanced rent of Rs.22,500/- by the 5^th respondent was contrary to Section 34A of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959. The amount due from the petitioner for the period commencing from 01.07.2016 to 30.06.2021 and that the arrears, according to the respondents, come to about 13,21,490/-, out of which the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- so far. However, copy of the receipt has not been filed.

¶32

3.Considering the fact that the amount involved is huge as compared to the rent that was payable by the petitioner, I am inclined to dispose of this writ petition by permitting the petitioner to file a statutory appeal before the 3^rd respondent/the Commissioner subject to the petitioner paying 50% of Rs.13,21,490/-. If the aforesaid amount is paid by the petitioner within such time, the 3^rd respondent shall number the appeal and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. Pending disposal of such appeal, the petitioner shall continue to pay the enhanced rent. All the amounts paid by the petitioner will be subject to the final appropriation in terms of the order to be passed by the 3^rd respondent. In case, the petitioner is required to pay further amount, the petitioner shall pay the same, failing which, the petitioner can be evicted in terms of Sections 78 and 79 of the Act.

¶33

4.The writ petition stands disposed of, in terms of the above observation. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶34

// True Copy //

¶35

/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶36

¶37

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

¶38

2/3

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.4088 of 2022

¶40

To 1.The Secretary to Government, Department of Tamil Development and Culture and Hindu Religious Endowment Department, St.George Fort, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, St.George Fort, Chennai 600 009. 3.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034. 4.The Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, Trichy, Trichy District. +1 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-19260[F] dated 19/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-19335[F] dated 19/04/2022 ) W.P.(MD) No.4088 of 2022 18.04.2022 RK(29/04/2022) 3P 7C

¶41

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

¶42

3/3

Prakash. v. Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash. v. Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

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

V.G. Nagarajan Vs the Commissioner of Police

Jyothimaan Beedi Company Private Limited Vs the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Sekkappan Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

M/S. V.M.S.V. Exports Ltd., Vs Joint Secretary, G.O.I.

Balasubramanian.M Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

Paramount Textiles Mills Private Limited Vs The Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade