Madras High Court
K.Lalitha vs The Official Trustee Of Tamil Nadu on 25 April, 2022
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
K.Lalitha .. Appellant
-vs-
The Official Trustee of Tamil Nadu
High Court Campus
Chennai 600 104 .. Respondent
Memorandum of Grounds of Original Side Appeal filed under Order
XXXVI, Rule 1 of the Original Side Rules read with Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, against the order dated 03.12.2021 passed in Application No.3607
of 2021 in Application No.1866 of 2021 in C.S.No.177 of 1939 on the file
of the Original Side of this Court.
For Appellant :: Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan
For Respondent :: Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by T.RAJA, J.)
The appellant, challenging the impugned order dated 03.12.2021
passed in Application No.3607 of 2021 in Application No.1866 of 2021 in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
C.S.No.177 of 1939 calling upon her to pay the balance licence fee of
Rs.43,45,693/-, has filed this original side appeal.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the
Bodyguard Muneeswarar Temple was established in the platform of
Pallavan Salai, Chennai facing east, which is one of the established Charities
of the Madras Ordnance Pensioned Lascars registered under the Act 21 of
1860. This temple is administered by the scheme decree dated 01.08.1941
passed in C.S.No.177 of 1939 and it is now under the control of the Official
Trustee of Tamil Nadu, High Court, Madras, the respondent herein. When
the temple is having an extent of 64 feet of land in the platform with the
hundi box maintained in the premises, after the appellant's grandfather and
father were managing the temple, her mother obtained licence from the
respondent following the direction of this Court and this is how the appellant
has been managing the temple from the year 2012 on the basis of the licence
obtained from the respondent. When the licence was earlier granted for a
period of three years making provisions for payment of amount by
instalments, considering the pathetic condition of the appellant's ancestors,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
this Court, by order dated 02.07.1998 in Application No.1187 of 1998,
permitted the appellant's late father Loganathan to obtain licence for a period
of three years from 01.01.1998 to 31.12.2000. However, for the period from
01.05.2019 to 30.04.2020, when the appellant became the highest bidder for
Rs.76.20 lakhs, adding Rs.4,000/- over and above Rs.76.20 lakhs, she was
permitted to pay the amount of Rs.76.24 lakhs by way of instalments on
10.05.2019, 10.08.2019, 10.11.2019 and 10.02.2020. The aforesaid amount
of Rs.76.24 lakhs was also paid by the appellant upto 20.02.2020, in
addition to Rs.13.73 lakhs paid towards GST. It is also stated that due to
Covid-19 lockdown period, the said temple was closed down. Besides, the
appellant also employed 32 individuals, namely, 4 poojaris, 3 security men,
10 persons for cleaning and regulating the parking of vehicles and 15
persons to conduct poojas in respect of the vehicles coming to the temple.
Although the temple was kept locked, the poojaris were paid in full and for
others, half pay was made, because 30 families are depending upon the
income of the temple. However, from 22.03.2020, there was no pooja
activities, as a result, the hundi collections were also kept locked. But the
licence fee had been paid upto 30.04.2020. Finally this Court, by order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
dated 18.12.2020 in Application No.2084 of 2020, extending the licence to
the appellant for a period of one year from 01.05.2020 to 30.04.2021 on
payment of Rs.85 lakhs being the annual licence fee with 18% GST for
performing poojas and maintaining the hundial collections of the Bodyguard
Muneeswarar Temple, also further directed the appellant to pay the
aforesaid amount in four equal instalments. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant
took out Application No.597 of 2020 seeking modification of the order dated
18.12.2020 and this Court, after hearing the parties, by order dated
12.03.2021, directed the appellant to pay a sum of Rs.56,66,667/- as licence
fee for the period from 01.09.2020 to 30.04.2021, for the reason that the
Administrator General and Official Trustee objected to modify the licence
period from 01.09.2020 to 31.08.2021, on the premise that when the licence
period was to expire on 30.04.2021, a public auction may be conducted by
fixing the minimum upset licence fee of Rs.1,10,00,000/- for one year from
01.05.2021 to 30.04.2022. When the respondent has been periodically
collecting the licence fee from the year 2011-12, as detailed below,
Sl. Year Amount of licence fee % of increase per
No. year in relation to
previous year
1 2011-12 Rs.42,75,000/- -
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
Sl. Year Amount of licence fee % of increase per
No. year in relation to
previous year
2 2012-13 Rs.49,00,000/- 14%
3 2013-14 Rs.54,00,000/- 10%
4 2014-15 Rs.58,10,000/- 7%
5 2015-16 Rs.62,20,000/- 7%
6 2016-17 Rs.64,80,000/- 4%
7 2017-18 Rs.70,00,000/- 8%
8 2018-19 Rs.76,20,000/- 8.8%
9 2019-20 Rs.76,24,000/- 0.05%
10 2020-21 Rs.85,00,000/- 11%
(proportionate sum of
Rs.56,66,667/- was
paid)
11 2021-22 Rs.1,00,00,000/- 17%
only for the previous year, the respondent cannot project a wrong picture
before this Court, because the percentage of enhancement during the Covid
pandemic period between 2020 and 2021 should be reasonable considering
the loss suffered by all people. Moreover, the Government also issued
various Government Orders directing the closure of all the religious
institutions including the temple managed by the appellant as a licence
holder. In fact, G.O.(Ms) No.504, Revenue and Disaster Management (DM-
IV) Department dated 07.08.2021 indicated that in order to avoid public
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
gathering, all the religious places and places of worship shall remain closed
on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The said restrictions were also
subsequently extended by issuing another G.O.(Ms) No.522, Revenue and
Disaster Management (DM-IV) Department dated 21.08.2021. Therefore,
from the date of issuance of the aforementioned Government Orders, if the
Friday, Saturday and Sunday are taken into consideration, the temple in
question remained closed for a total period of 78 days. Hence, out of the
licence fee amount of Rs.1,18,00,000/- including 18% GST, when the
appellant had already paid a sum of Rs.65,21,729/- on various dates, the
appellant is liable to pay only a sum of Rs.27,56,609/-, as the temple
remained closed for a total period of 78 days, for which a sum of
Rs.25,21,662/- (Rs.32,329/- x 78 = Rs.25,21,662/-) has to be deducted.
3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
also.
4. It is not in dispute that the lockdown was imposed by the State
Government through various Government Orders to avoid the spread of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
Covid-19 pandemic. However, in G.O.(Ms) No.504, Revenue and Disaster
Management (DM-IV) Department dated 07.08.2021, while extending the
lockdown from 09.08.2021 to 06.00 AM on 23.08.2021, among other
restrictions, the following restriction was imposed, which reads thus:-
“A) In order to avoid public gathering at the same
place and at the same time, all the religious places
and places of worship shall remain closed on
Friday, Saturday and Sunday.”
These restrictions were subsequently ordered to be extended by issuing
another G.O.(Ms) No.522, Revenue and Disaster Management (DM-IV)
Department dated 21.08.2021, observing as follows:-
“2) Now, Hon'ble Chief Minister has conducted a
review meeting to evaluate the Corona prevention
activities and the necessity of providing vaccination
to everybody and actions needed to be taken in this
regard. Based on the above review meeting, the
Government hereby order, under Disaster
Management Act, 2005 to extend the restrictions
from 23.8.2021 to 06.00 A.M., on 06.09.2021....”
5. When the aforementioned two Government Orders have been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
issued by the State Government specifically directing the places of worship
to be closed on every Friday, Saturday and Sunday apart from the complete
lockdown imposed earlier, from the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant, it appears that the temple in question
remained closed for a total period of 78 days during the licence period, i.e.,
for 24 days in the months of August and September 2021 and for 54 days
between May and July, 2021, which period has not been excluded by the
respondent and the learned single Judge. Therefore, while deducting the sum
of Rs.25,21,662/- for a period of 78 days @ Rs.32,329/- per day, we hereby
direct the appellant to pay the balance amount of Rs.27,56,609/- to the
respondent on or before 30.04.2022 as agreed to by the learned counsel
appearing for the appellant before us. With this modification in the
impugned order, the original side appeal stands disposed of. Consequently,
C.M.P.No.5364 of 2022 is closed. However, there is no order as to costs.
Speaking/Non speaking order (T.R.,J.) (S.S., J.)
Index : yes/no 25.04.2022
Issue copy on 4.7.2022
ss
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
To
1. The Sub Assistant Registrar (O.S.)
High Court, Madras
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
T.RAJA, J.
and
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
ss
O.S.A.No.68 of 2022
25.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
