Dismissed

T.P.Abdulla v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC9 Sept 2024WP/4485/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged a government order evicting him from restaurant premises on temple land, claiming long-standing tenancy since 1981 and pending alienation application. The Court found the unregistered rental agreement improper, no proof of rent payment or consent for superstructure, possession already taken in 2019, dismissed the writ petition but allowed participation in any future public au

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; liberty granted to petitioner to participate in any post-development public auction subject to payment of arrears, if any.

T.P.Abdulla Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Landlord and Tenant | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

WP.No.4485 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 09.09.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶6

WP.No.4485 of 2021 and W.M.P.Nos.5112 & 5115 of 2021

¶7

T.P.Abdulla .. Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. The State of Tamil Nadu

¶10

Represented by the Secretary Additional Chief Secretary to the Government Tousism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department Fort St.George, Chennai- 600 009

¶11

2. The Commissioner

¶12

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administration Department Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.

¶13

3. The Joint Commissioner

¶14

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administration Department Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.

¶15

The Executive Officer Arulmigu Agatheewarar Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal Temple Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34. .. Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the order G.O. No.15 (Tourism Culture and Religious Endowments (Aa.Ni.3-1) Department ) dated 10.01.2020 in revision petition R.P. No.8 of 2019 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue his business at https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis premises bearing No.302, Valuvar Kottam High Road, Nungambakkam,

1/6

WP.No.4485 of 2021

Chennai – 34.

For Petitioner : Mr.Manoj Sreevalsan For Respondents : Mr.K.Karthikeyan(Government Advocate) HR & CE for R1 and 2 Mr.N.Nikilesh for R4 for M/s.A.S.Kailash & Associates

¶21

ORDER

¶22

This writ petition is filed challenging the records relating to the order

¶23

G.O.Ms.No.15 (Tourism Culture and Religious Endowments (Aa.Ni.3-1) Department ) dated 10.01.2020 in revision petition R.P. No.8 of 2019 passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue his business at premises bearing No.302, Valuvar Kottam High Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 34.

¶24

The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's uncle namely Abu Backer was running a restaurant in the third respondent temple property from 1945 and a rental agreement was executed between them during the year 1975. During the year 1981, the said Abu Backer transferred his business rights to the petitioner and the petitioner is running the hotel business, since 1981. The petitioner has also put up superstructure in the subject premises. Thereafter, due to the dispute with regard the payment of rent, the impugned order has been passed on the revision petition filed by the petitioner in evicting the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis petitioner from the subject premises. Hence, this writ petition.

¶25

2/6

¶26

WP.No.4485 of 2021

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's

¶28

uncle namely Abu Backer entered a rental agreement with the third respondent in the year 1975. In fact, the earlier Hereditary Trustee made an application before the Commissioner under Section 34(1) of HR & CE Act in order to alienate the property in favour of the petitioner and the said application is pending and the petitioner is regularly paying the rent and a superstructure is also constructed by the petitioner. However, all of a sudden, the petitioner was evicted and possession was taken over by the HR & CE Department in the year 2019 itself and the possession is with the third respondent temple. He also seeks a direction of this Court to issue direction to the fourth respondent temple and the HR & CE Department to go for development of the property and after the development, if they are conducting any public auction, liberty may be granted to the petitioner to participate in the public auction in accordance with law.

¶29

Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record.

¶30

On perusal of the entire records reveals that the petitioner's uncle entered into a rental agreement with the Hereditary Trustee. The rental https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis agreement dated 01.03.1975 is an unregistered rental agreement executed in

¶31

3/6

¶32

WP.No.4485 of 2021

¶33

favour of one Abu Backer without the approval of the HR & CE Department and the same is not proper as per the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. Though the petitioner claims he is paying rent regularly, however, no document is produced before this Court to establish the same. Further, the petitioner has not produced any document before this Court to prove that the consent of the fourth respondent was obtained in construction of the building in the land owned by the fourth respondent. Though the petitioner produced 1 rental receipt dated 30.05.2003, except 1 document, no documents are produced with regard to the payment of the rent to the fourth respondent temple. All these facts shows that the petitioner is in illegal occupation of the fourth respondent temple without paying any rents.. Further, it is also to be seen that the possession was already taken by the fourth respondent in the year 2019 itself.

¶34

Such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that the prayer sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted. However, liberty is granted to the 4^th respondent and the HR & CE Department for development and after development, if they are going for public auction, opportunity is to granted to the petitioner to participate in the auction subject to payment of arrears, if any payable by the petitioner to the fourth respondent temple.

¶35

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

¶36

4/6

¶37

WP.No.4485 of 2021

¶38

In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶39

09.09.2024

¶40

dhk Index:Yes/No Internet: Yes/No

¶41

¶42

The Secretary Additional Chief Secretary to the Government The State of Tamil Nadu Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department Fort St.George, Chennai- 600 009

¶43

The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administration Department Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.

¶44

The Joint Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Administration Department Nungambakkam, Chennai- 600 034.

¶45

M. DHANDAPANI, J.

¶46

dhk

¶47

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

¶48

5/6

¶49

WP.No.4485 of 2021

¶50

The Executive Officer Arulmigu Agatheewarar Prasanna Venkatesa Perumal Temple Nungambakkam, Chennai - 34.

¶51

W.P.No.4485 of 2021

¶52

09.09.2024

¶53

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

¶54

6/6

T.P.Abdulla v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.P.Abdulla v. 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

A.K.Nawaz Vs The Honourable Ombudsman

R.Kalyana Sundaram, Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

P.N.Mariappan, Vs The Executive Officer

Sridhar Vs Inspector General of Registration

J.Saroja Vs The Inspector General of Registration

A.Radhakrishnan Vs The Secretary to Government