Madras High Court
The Managing Director vs Neelavathy (Deceased) on 6 July, 2021
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.8075 of 2019
1.The Managing Director
Tamilnadu Slum Clearance Board,
No.5, Kamaraj Salai, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Chairman,
Tamilnadu Slum Clearance Board,
No.5, Kamaraj Salai, Chennai - 600 005. .. Appellants
Vs
Neelavathy (Deceased)
G.Kasturi .. Respondent
Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 20.12.2017 made in W.P.No.165 of 2010.
For Appellants : Mr.M.Raja Sekhar
For Respondent : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan, Sr.Counsel
for Mr.G.Ravisankar
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)
The appellants have come forward to challenge the order of the
learned single Judge, who, while quashing the order impugned,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
directed the appellants to make the payment of Rs.1,28,084/- fixed as
on 09.11.1992 with 6% interest.
2.By the proceedings dated 09.11.1992, the first writ petitioner
(since deceased) was asked to pay a sum of Rs.1,28,084/- for the
encroached portion of 1344 sq.ft. It appears that the aforesaid amount
was not paid leading to the action for removal followed by the
impugned communication dated 23.12.2009 by which the information
was given that the patta cannot be granted.
3.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, placing reliance
upon the additional documents filed during the pendency of the appeal,
submitted that an appeal has been preferred by the deceased writ
petitioner and there was a communication on 16.12.1993 directing her
to remove the encroachment.
4.Learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent submitted
that the aforesaid facts having not been placed before the learned
single Judge, it is not open to the appellant to rely upon the same. On
the question raised by this Court with respect to the interest
component, the learned senior counsel fairly submitted that reasonable
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
interest can be fixed.
5.There is no cancellation order per se though there is a non-
compliance on the part of the first writ petitioner (since deceased). By
the order dated 09.11.1992, she was asked to pay certain amount,
which she did not pay admittedly. Therefore, she is not a trespasser
per se. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and the extent of
land being 1344 sq.ft. alone, the learned single Judge passed the
aforesaid order exercising his judicial discretion. The document relied
upon as rightly submitted by the learned senior counsel for the
respondent cannot be pressed into service in this appeal.
6.However, we find that for the failure on the part of the original
writ petitioner and the respondent, the appellants cannot be made to
suffer. Though the guideline value as on today cannot be fixed by the
appellants, had the amount fixed as per the guideline value prevailing
in the year 1992 been paid at the appropriate time, the situation would
not have arisen. Thus, we find that the order of the learned single
Judge requires to be accepted though the interest of 6% per annum is
grossly inadequate especially by taking note of the increasing value of
the land and the failure of the original writ petitioner and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
respondent to make the payment.
7.In such view of the matter, the order passed by the learned
single Judge stands modified to the effect that the respondent herein
will have to pay the amount as indicated by the learned single Judge
with 12% interest per annum from the date of the communication
dated 09.11.1992 within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment, failing which, it is well open to the
appellants to take a decision on merit. We make it clear that the said
direction and the consequential order of the learned single Judge will
have to be complied with.
8.With the above observation, the writ appeal stands disposed
of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(M.M.S., J.) (R.N.M., J.)
06.07.2021
Index:Yes/No
mmi/ssm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and
R.N.MANJULA,J.
mmi
W.A.No.1131 of 2019
06.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
