Madras High Court
Bunder Adivelama Bandhu Samuham vs Madireddy Sathya Venkateswar Rao on 4 March, 2021
C.S.No.191 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Date : 04.03.2021
CORAM
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE R. PONGIAPPAN
C.S.No.191 of 2020
Bunder Adivelama Bandhu Samuham
Rep by its President
and Authorised Signatory P.S.Prasad Rao
having its registered office at
New Door No.81, Lake View Road,
West Mambalam, Chennai 600033. .. Plaintiff
vs.
Madireddy Sathya Venkateswar Rao
S/o Madireddy Virupaksha Rao Naidu
Door No.14, Thulasingham street,
Perambur, Chennai 600011. .. Defendant
Civil Suit filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules read
with Order VII Rule 1 CPC praying for the following judgment and decree
against the defendant, declaring that the Plaintiff is the sole and absolute
owner of the suit properties viz., 1) Door No.58, Rangasayye Street,
Perambaur, Chennai & 2) New Door No.42, Old No.56, Siruvallur Main
Road, Perambur, Chennai 600011, morefully described in item No.1 and
Item No.2 of the schedule herein and consequently grant a Permanent
Injunction restraining the defendant, his agents or anybody else, claiming
1/12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
under or through him, from in any manner, interfering with the Plaintiff his
peaceful possession of the said schedule mentioned properties with costs.
For Plaintiff : Mr.P.B. Balaji
For defendant : No appearance
JUDGMENT
The suit is filed for partition for dividing the suit property into four
equal shares and allot three such shares to the plaintiffs to declare that the
Plaintiff is the sole and absolute owner of the suit properties Items 1 and 2
and consequently grant a Permanent Injunction restraining the defendant,
his agents or anybody else, claiming under or through him, from in any
manner, interfering with the Plaintiff his peaceful possession of the said
schedule mentioned properties with costs.
2.The brief facts of the case of the plaintiffs are as follows:
2(a) The case of the plaintiffs is that that plaintiff's society is a
registered society, formed more then 140 years ago and subsequently after
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
about 20years from the date of formation, the Plaintiff society created a
property wing under the name and style of "Voodayavar Fund, Madras".
The object of the said Voodayavar Fund, Masdras was to identify properties
and acquire the same which would ensure the Samuham. Accordingly, the
said Voodayavaqr Fund, Madras acquired two properties morefully
described in the Plaint schedule as Items 1 and 2. In fact, the then members
in and by proceedings dated 14.08.1900 resolved to purchase the said
property for the purpose of performing Voodayavar Uthsavam and
nominated 5 Panchayat Dars to be included in the Sale Deed for the purpose
of registration.
2(b) In 1967 after the inception of the Societies Registration Act, the
Plaintiff society was registered. After several years, early in this century the
Plaintiff society felt no necessity for `Voodayavar Fund, Madras' as the
objects were duly fulfilled after the purchase of 2 properties and hence the
said `Voodayavar Fund, Madras' was merged with the Plaintiff's society and
the Plaintiff's society took over the control of both the properties and the
society was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
1975, and the assessments were in the name of Plaintiff's society. The
income generated from the said properties by way of rent is being utilized
for the performance of uthsavams in 3 temples in the city of Chennai
including maintaining the schedule properties as well.
2(c) While so, to the utter shock and disbelief to the Plaintiff Society,
the Defendant, out of the blue, issued a legal notice dated 24.12.2019
questioning the right of the Plaintiff Society and also made false, vexatious
and baseless allegations against the functioning of the Plaintiff Society. The
defendant also indicated in the notice that the Defendant and his family
members were willing to take over the plaintiff society itself, thereby
exposing theri ulterior design to usurp the valueable properties belonging to
the Plaintiff Society. In any event by way of abundant caution especially
with the Defendant casting a doubt on the Plaintiff's title itself to the
schedule properties, the Plaintiff has been advised to seek for declaration of
its title over the suit schedule properties more fully described as item Nos.1
and 2 and also for a consequential relief of a permanent injunction to protect
its possession. Hence the suit.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
3. Though summons was served and learned counsel appeared for the
Defendant on 22.09.2020, he has not chosen to file written statement.
Hence the suit was listed under the caption 'Undefended Board'. Even after
posted the suit under the caption Undefended Board, the Defendant has not
filed written statement. Hence the Defendant was set ex-parte on
22.01.2021.
4. On the side of the plaintiff, the Authorised Signatory of the
Plaintiff's Society was examined as P.W.1 and Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.19 were
marked.
Exhibits produced on the side of the plaintiffs:
S.No. Exhibits Date Description
1. P-1 18.01.2020 Copy of Minutes of the Managing
Committee Meeting.
2. P-2 27.09.1900 Copy of document No.1264 of
3. P-3 27.09.1900 Copy of document No.1266 of
4. P-4 23.10.1991 Copy of Patta
5. P-5 09/02/2018 Copy of Memorandum of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
S.No. Exhibits Date Description
Association and Certificate of
Registration of Societies
6. P-6 -- Original book of Memorandum of
Association.
7. P-7 17.02.1994 Copy of Form - 5G
8. P-8 15.03.1988 Original Property Tax Receipt
No.34369
9. P-9 11/04/1988 Original Miscellaneous Receipt
No.81
10. P-10 11/04/1988 Original Miscellaneous Receipt
No.256
P-11 -- Original Urband Tax Assessment
11 Order
P-12 Copy of Certificate of Registration
12 090218 of the Plaintiff's Society
P-13 Original receipt from Arulmigu
Kalyana Varadharajaperumal
Temple (Multiple receipts bearing
P-14 Original receipt from Chenna
Kesava Prumal Tample (Multiple
14 120418 receipts bearing Nos.3167, 3168)
15 P-15 26.09.2018 Original Property Tax Receipt
P-16 -- Original Property tax demand card
16 (Bill NO.1860- book)
P-17 14.12.2018 Original receipt from Sri Chenna
Kesava Perumal Temple (Multiple
17 Receipts bearing Nos.3984, 3985)
P-18 24.12.2019 Original Legal Notice issued by the
18 Defendant
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
S.No. Exhibits Date Description
P-19 Office copy of the reply notice
dated 08.01.2020 issued by the
19 080120 Plaintiff
Witnesses examined on the side of the plaintiffs:
P.W.1. - Mr.P.S.Prasad Rao
5. Heard the learned counsel for the plaintiff and perused the records.
6. P.W.1, in his evidence has spoken about the formation of the
Plaitniff's Society 140 years ago and after 20 years from the date of
formation created a property wing under the name and style of "Voodayavar
Fund, Madras." The said Fund acquired two property in the city of Madras.
Thereafter, in 1967 after the inception of Societies Registration Act, the
Plaintiff Society was registered as a Society and the said Voodayavar Fund,
Madras was merged with the Plaintiff's society. The Plantiff's Society carry
out and perform uthsavams in three temples in the City of Madras. P.W.1 in
his evidence further stated that the plaintiff's society is in absolute
possession of the suit scheduel propertes from 1900 onwards. The income
generated from the said properties by way of rent is being utilized for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
performance of uthsavams in 3 temples in the city of Chennai, maintaining
the schedule properties as well as for payment of property taxes, metro water
charges and taxes, etc.,
7. On 24.12.2019 the defendant issued notice to the plaintiff
questioning the right of the Plaintiff Society and also made false allegations
against the functioning of the Plaintiff Society. In response to the said
notice, on 08.01.2020, the Plaintiff Society issued a fitting reply, clearly
spelling out that the Defendant or for that matter anyone else claiming under
the Defendant has no iota of right, title in fact not only over the schedule
mentioned properties but over the Plaintiff Society as well. In spite of the
factual and detailed reply the Defendant has continued to harass the office
bearers of the Plaintiff Society, frequently visited the registered office of the
Plaintiff Society,claiming stake over the said properties and also the Plaintiff
Society. Hence the Plaintiff has filed this suit for the reliefs as mentioned
above.
8. In support of his evidence, P.W.1 has marked the documents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
Exs.P.1 to P.19 which all are show that the Plaintiff Society is the absolute
owner of the property. To challenge claim, the Defendant has not appeared
before this Court either in person or through his counsel. Hence the
defendant set exparte. Since the evidence of P.W.1 and documents filed on
behalf of the plaintiff remains unchallenged and there is no rebuttable
evidence against the case of the plaintiff this court is of the view that the
plaintiff have proved their case.
8. In the result, the suit is decreed as prayed for with costs.
04.03.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
Speaking/Non-speaking order
ggs
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
C.S. No.191 of 2020
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.,
This matter has been listed today under the caption "for being
mentioned” at the instance of the learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff.
2. The learned counsel for the plaintiff submitted that, in the
judgment dated 04.03.2021 in C.S.No.191 of 2020, in paragraph No.1, it
has been wrongly typed and, therefore, the same may be directed to be
corrected.
3. Accepting the above submissions of the learned counsel
for the plaintiff, the paragraph No.1 of the judgment dated 04.03.2021 in
C.S.No.191 of 2020 would read as follows:
“The suit is filed to grant a permanent injunction,
restraining the defendant, his agents or anybody
else, claiming under or through him, from in any
manner, interfering with the plaintiff his peaceful
possession of the said schedule mentioned
properties with costs”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.
sri
4. Registry is directed to carry out the same and issue a fresh
copy of the judgment to the parties concerned.
13.12.2021
sri
C.S. No.191 of 2020
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.S.No.191 of 2020
R. PONGIAPPAN, J.
ggs
C.S.No.191 of 2020
04.03.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
