Geetha Raman vs The Tahsildhar
2023 Latest Caselaw 14881 Mad

Madras High Court

Geetha Raman vs The Tahsildhar on 24 November, 2023

Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala, D.Bharatha Chakravarthy

                                                                            W.A.No.2450 of 2022


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                DATED:    24.11.2023

                                                      CORAM


                             THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA, CHIEF JUSTICE
                                                          AND
                                  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY


                                                W.A.No.2450 of 2022

                     1.Geetha Raman
                     2.S.Ravi
                     3.Srimathi Kumar
                     4.Vasumathi Madhavan
                     5.Sumathi Srinivasan                              ..    Appellants

                        (Appellants 1, 3, 4 & 5 are represented by
                         their power agent S.Ravi - 2nd appellant)

                                                    Vs.



                     1.The Tahsildhar,
                       Mylapore Taluk,
                       Greenways Road,
                       Chennai-600 028.

                     2.The Executive Officer,
                       Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department
                       of Arulmigu Madhavaperumal Thirukoil,
                       Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.                ..   Respondents



                     Page 1 of 5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                    W.A.No.2450 of 2022


                     Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
                     order         of   the    learned   Single   Judge   dated   3.8.2022   passed   in
                     W.P.No.19667 of 2022.


                                        For the Appellants         : Mr.V.Chandrakanthan

                                        For the Respondents        : Mr.P.Muthukumar
                                                                     State Government Pleader
                                                                     for respondent No.1

                                                                   : Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan
                                                                     Spl. Govt. Pleader (HR&CE)
                                                                     for respondent No.2


                                                            JUDGMENT

(Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

We have heard Mr.V.Chandrakanthan, learned counsel for the

appellants; Mr.P.Muthukumar, learned State Government Pleader for

the first respondent; and, Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan, learned Special

Government Pleader (HR & CE) for the second respondent.

2. The appellants have filed a petition seeking direction to issue

patta in their favour. The temple claims that the land belongs it.

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

3. The learned Single Judge directed the parties to establish their

rights in accordance with law and further directed that recovery of the

temple property shall be strictly in accordance with law.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the second

respondent has locked the premises without following due process of

law.

5. Learned Special Government Pleader (HR & CE) submits that

it was to protect the property that the lock and seal was placed. He

accepts that no notice was issued, nor any proceeding was

undertaken.

6. In the light of that, the second respondent shall remove the

lock and seal, preferably within seven days from today. The second

respondent is entitled to proceed under Section 78 of the Tamil Nadu

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. It is also open

to the second respondent to take such other course as may be

permissible under law. It is open to the appellants to take such other

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

proceedings as may be advisable.

7. With these observations, the writ appeal stands disposed of.

There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.19016 of

2022 is closed.

                                                              (S.V.G., CJ.)            (D.B.C., J.)
                                                                              24.11.2023
                     Index            : Yes/No
                     Neutral Citation : Yes/No
                     bbr

                     To

                     1.The Tahsildhar,
                       Mylapore Taluk,
                       Greenways Road,
                       Chennai-600 028.

                     2.The Executive Officer,

Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, of Arulmigu Madhavaperumal Thirukoil, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.

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

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

bbr

24.11.2023

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