Dismissed

K.Vajravel v. The Commissioner

Madras HC16 Jun 2023WP/6820/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This disposition dismisses a writ petition challenging a show cause notice issued for sealing a property due to rental arrears under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act. The petitioner failed to comply with the interim order to deposit fines in installments, triggering the default clause.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the respondents are at liberty to proceed with sealing the property under Section 79(c).

K.Vajravel Vs The Commissioner — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 16.06.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P No.6820 of 2023 and W.M.P No.6917 of 2023

¶7

Mr.K.Vajaravelu Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The Commissioner,

¶10

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶11

2.The Joint Commissioner,

¶12

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶13

3.The Assistant Commissioner,

¶14

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶15

4.The Arulmigu Reveeswar Temple, Represented by its Trustee, Murthinagar Street, Vyasarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.

¶16

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Reveeswar Temple, Murthinagar Street, Vyasarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.

¶17

Respondents

¶18

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the entire records in pertaining to the impugned

¶19

¶20

notice affixed on/in the petition property's bearing Door No.66, situated at Erukkanchery High Road, Vyasarpadi, chennai 600 039, on 10.02.2023 for sealing the petition property and attached the same, as per the section 79 (c) of the Tamil nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 from the 5th Respondent and quash the same.

¶21

For Petitioner : No Appearance

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Government Pleader

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This Court passed the following order on 15.03.2023.

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed against the Show Cause Notice issued under Section 79(c) of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, as to why the building should not be sealed for the arrears of rent.

¶26

2.Mr.K.Karthikeyan, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department based upon the instructions from the Executive Officer, Arulmigu Raveeswar Temple, Vyasarpadi, Chennai submitted that, the property is now enjoyed by K.Vajravelu, Nagaraj and Arumugam and the petitioner is running a commercial building and also a residential area to an extent of 216.48 Sq.ft and Commercial building to an extent of 293.52 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Sq.ft, in total 510 Sq.ft. The copy of the split up details of year wise rental arrears is also served on the learned counsel for the

¶27

¶28

petitioner.

¶29

3. It appears that K.Kannappan, father of the petitioner also remitted some amount and after adjustment of the said amount, with regard to a portion occupied by the petitioner, including the arrears of rent comes about Rs.10,58,640/(Rupees Ten Lakhs Fifty Eight Thousand Six Hundred and Forty only).

¶30

4. Hence, there shall be an order of interim stay, on condition that the petitioner shall deposit the entire amount in four monthly installments viz., Rs.3,08,640/-, Rs.2,50,000/-, Rs.2,50,000/- and Rs.2,50,000/-, within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner failed to pay any one of the installment as stated above, the interim order granted by this Court shall stands automatically vacated and it is open to the respondents to proceed in accordance with notice under Section 79(c) of the Tamil Nadu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶31

5. Post the matter on 16.06.2023.

¶32

2.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that interim order passed by this Court has not been complied with by the petitioner.

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

3.In view of the above, the default clause of the interim order will come into

¶36

effect and it is left open to the respondents to proceed in accordance with the notice issued under Section 79(c) of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959.

¶37

4.Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

16.06.2023 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No ssr

¶39

¶40

1.The Commissioner,

¶41

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶42

2.The Joint Commissioner,

¶43

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶44

3.The Assistant Commissioner,

¶45

Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable and Endowments Department, Door No.119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034.

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4.The Arulmigu Reveeswar Temple, Represented by its Trustee,

¶47

¶48

Murthinagar Street, Vyasarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.

¶49

5.The Executive Officer, Arulmigu Reveeswar Temple, Murthinagar Street, Vyasarpadi, Chennai – 600 039.

¶50

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

¶51

¶52

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶53

ssr

¶54

W.P No.6820 of 2023 and W.M.P No.6917 of 2023

¶55

16.06.2023

¶56

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

K.Vajravel v. The Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Vajravel v. The Commissioner

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

K.Sekar Vs The Commissioner

A.S.Cargo Movers Private Limited Vs The Chairman and managing Director

P.Easwaran Vs The District Collector/Chairman

Dr.M.J.Mohan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

C.Varanavasai Vs K.v.Muralidharan,I.a.S

P.N.Rakesh Kannan Vs K.Chandra Kumar