Madras High Court
V.S.Kumaran vs The District Revenue Officer on 23 December, 2021
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
and
W.M.P.No.31735 of 2018
V.S.Kumaran ...Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Vellore District,
Vellore.
2.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited,
Represented by its Territory Manager (Retail),
Chennai Territorial office,
No.35, Vaidyanathan Street,
Tondiarpet, Chennai – 600 081.
3.M/s.C.LAkshmi Narasimhan & Son,
Represented by its Managing Partner,
Ms.R.Sathya Priya,
No.107, Arani Road,
Sankarapalayam, Vellore – 1.
...Respondents
PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd and 3rd
respondents to handover the possession of property to an extent of 12,000
sq.ft. situated in S.No.197/1B in D.No.96 Allapuram Village, Vellore Taluk
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
to the petitioner and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to pay
the arrears of rent from 01.05.2013 onwards as rent at the rate of Rs.25 per
sq.ft. along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. till date of handing over the
same.
For Petitioner : M/S.M.Raja Sekhar
For R1 : Mrs.C.Meera Arumugam
Additional Government Pleader
For R2 : Mr.M.Vijayan
for M/S.King & Partridge
For R3 : Mr.S.Mohamed Uduman
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed, seeking for a mandamus, to direct
the 2nd and 3rd respondents to handover the possession of the property,
measuring an extent of 12,000 sq.ft., comprised in S.No.197/1B, bearing
D.No.96, situated at Allapuram Village, Vellore Taluk to the petitioner and
further, to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to pay arrears of rent at the rate
of Rs.25 per sq.ft. along with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from 01.05.2013
till the date of handing over the said property.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the property,
as described above, was leased out by the vendors of the petitioner in favour
of the second respondent by virtue of a lease deed, dated 15.06.1963 for a
period of 20 years, who (second respondent) inducted the third respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
into the property. Thereafter, the said lease was renewed for a further period
of 20 years i.e., upto 14.06.2003. Considering the long association, the
petitioner's vendor has offered to sell the property to the 2 nd respondent-
BPCL. However, they have not shown any willingness to purchase the
property without paying the rent. Since 2003, the 2nd respondent has not
even paid the rent to the vendor of the petitioner. While that be so, the
petitioner purchased the said property in the year 2013 by virtue of a sale
deed, vide Document No.5313/2013 dated 24.04.2013 and the same was also
intimated to the respondents 2 and 3 and despite the same, they have not paid
any rent to the petitioner. Therefore, the learned counsel submitted that, the
petitioner, having left with no other option, has filed the present Writ
Petition seeking for the aforesaid relief.
3. Mr.M.Vijayan, learned counsel for the second respondent-BPCL,
though raised objection to the filing of this writ petition on the ground that,
the petitioner has an efficacious remedy by way of filing a Petition under the
provisions of the City Tenants' Protection Act before the Civil Court, the
learned counsel fairly submitted that the present issue is squarely covered by
decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Company Vs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
Territory Manager, Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and another
reported in 2021 SCC online SC 1042.
4. In reply, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits
that, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the
question of approaching the Civil Court for the purpose of eviction under the
City Tenants Protection Act does not arise and the petitioner is entitled to file
Petition only for eviction. Therefore, this Writ Petition is maintainable.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties concerned and
perused the materials available on records.
6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is not owner of the property
and the property was leased out by the vendor of the property, which expired
as early as on 14.06.2003. The respondents were not able to produce any
documents with regard to the continuation of the lease subsequent to the
expiry of lease upto 14.06.2003. That apart, the respondents 2nd and 3rd are
not able to produce any other document to show that they made payment of
rent either to the petitioner or to the vendor of the petitioner from
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
14.06.2003. It is the contention of the respondents 2 and 3 that they have
paid some rent, whereas, it is the case of the petitioner that they have not at
all paid the rent from the year 2003. Therefore, these disputed questions of
fact cannot be decided by this Court and this Court is of the view that, it
would be appropriate to relegate the parties to agitate the same before the
Civil Court with regard to payment of rent alone. However, insofar as the
issue with regard to the maintainability of this Writ Petition is concerned, as
per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the decision referred
to supra, the writ petition is maintainable and in this connection, it would be
beneficial to extract the relevant portion of the said judgment, which is as
hereunder:-
''15. It could thus be seen that this Court in the
case of R. Chandramouleeswaran (supra) has held that
this Court in the case of Bharat Petroleum Corporation
Ltd. v. Nirmala and other connected matters, while
interpreting the expression “actual physical possession
of land and building” would mean and require the
tenant to be in actual physical possession and
subclauses (b) would not apply if the tenant has sub-let
the building or has given the premises on leave and
licence basis. It further held that the aforesaid decision
would operate as res judicata in the case of the
appellant and the landlords who were parties to the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
decision. It further held that in other cases, it would
operate as a binding precedent under Article 141 of the
Constitution of India. Not only that, but this Court
made the position amply clear in the concluding
paragraph 28, which reads thus:
“28. Recording the aforesaid position,
we dismiss the present appeals by the
appellant, that is, the three petroleum
companies, and uphold the orders
passed by the High Court that the
appellant tenants would not be entitled
to the benefit and rights under the Act
unless they are in actual physical
possession of the building constructed
by them. In other words, in case the
appellants have let out or sub-let the
building or given it to third parties,
including dealers or licensees, they
would not be entitled to protection and
benefit under the Act.”. ''
6.1 Thus, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court,
as referred to above, this Court is of the considered view that, the Writ
Petition is maintainable insofar as the first limb of the prayer sought for, in
this Writ Petition is concerned, viz. to handover the possession of property.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
Hence, this Court directs the 2nd and 3rd respondents to vacate the said
premises and handover the peaceful possession of the property to the
petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
6.2 Insofar as the second limb of the prayer sought herein, viz., to
direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents is concerned, to pay the arrears of rent since
the same remains to be disputed questions of fact, the petitioner is at liberty
to approach the Civil Court seeking appropriate relief.
7. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
23.12.2021
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
jd/sp
Note to Registry: a) Issue order copy on 03.01.2022.
b) Post this matter 'For reporting
compliance' on 07.03.2022.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
To
1.The District Revenue Officer,
Vellore District,
Vellore.
2.The Territory Manager (Retail),
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited,
Chennai Territorial office,
No.35, Vaidyanathan Street,
Tondiarpet, Chennai – 600 081.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY.J.,
sp/jd
W.P.No.27278 of 2018
23.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
