Partly allowed

Saravana Sundari @ P. Vanthana v. Other Departments (Tn)

Madras HC22 Feb 2023A/854/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court closed an application to open a locked sub-let portion as the tenant was not disturbed in the residential area. It allowed an application filed by the State for vacant possession of the property due to unauthorized sub-letting in violation of the lease agreement.

What did the court decide?

A.No.854 of 2022 closed; A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 allowed granting vacant possession to the A.G. & O.T.

Saravana Sundari @ P. Vanthana Vs Other Departments (Tn) — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 in C.S.No.363 of 1912

¶2

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022

C.S.No.363 of 1912

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J

A.No.854 of 2022 has been filed to remove the sealed lock of the

¶7

applicant's tenanted premises and permit the applicant to reside in the schedule mentioned property.

¶8

When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the applicant in A.No.854 of 2022, who is the respondent in A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022.

¶9

The learned A.G. & O.T submitted that the property in question, namely in Door No.42/18, Saiva Muthaiyah Lane, Muthaiyal Pettai, Chennai-600 001, has two parts, which was in the custody of the applicant in A.No.854 of 2022. A portion of the property has also been sub-let by the applicant/Saravana Sundari @ P.Vanthana and that portion alone was kept under lock and key, and thereafter, the possession has been taken by Page No.1 / 4

¶10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶11

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 in C.S.No.363 of 1912

¶12

the A.G. & O.T. Insofar as the residential portion is concerned, the applicant in A.No.854 of 2022 was not disturbed and she is now in occupation of the same.

¶13

Since there was violation of the agreement by sub-letting the premises, the applicant in A.No.854 of 2022 is not entitled to retain that portion of the property which is sub-let. She is entitled to continue in the residential portion, provided she pays appropriate rent and does not violate the conditions of lease. Accordingly, no relief could be granted in A.No.854 of 2022, as there is no lock and seal in the residential portion of the property. The said A.No.854 of 2022 is accordingly closed.

¶14

As far as A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 are concerned, the same are

¶15

filed by the A.G. & O.T. The property in question has been leased out and that a portion of the property was sub-let by the tenant to a Briyani shop and the sub-letting is not permitted in terms of the lease agreement.

¶16

In view of the fact that there was violation of the lease agreement, Page No.2 / 4

¶17

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶18

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 in C.S.No.363 of 1912

¶19

the learned A.G. & O.T. is entitled to take vacant possession of the premises

¶20

in question.

¶21

For the foregoing reasons, A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 are

¶22

allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

22.02.2023

Page No.3 / 4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 in C.S.No.363 of 1912

¶28

S.VAIDYANATHAN, J

¶29

¶30

A.No.854 of 2022 and A.Nos.1358 to 1360 of 2022 in C.S.No.363 of 1912

¶31

22.02.2023

¶32

Page No.4 / 4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Saravana Sundari @ P. Vanthana v. Other Departments (Tn)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saravana Sundari @ P. Vanthana v. Other Departments (Tn)

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

Administrator General and Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu Vs Nil

Administrator General and Vs the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu and Another

Mr.B.Mustak Ahmed and another Vs The Administrator General and Official Trustee of Tamilnadu

M.Iqbal Ahmed Vs The Administrator General and Official Trustee of Tamilnadu

Vishal S.Ved Vs The Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu

Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu Vs M/s. Sarkaria Brothers