Madras High Court
M/S.Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd vs J.Sivaranjani on 13 March, 2025
Bench: J.Nisha Banu, S.Srimathy
WA(MD). No.2741 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Date : 13/03/2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE J.NISHA BANU
AND
THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
WA(MD). No.2741 of 2024
and CMP(MD) No.18895 of 2024
1.M/s.Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Represented by its Executive Director (Retail)
12/E &R maker towers
Cuffe Parade, Post Box 19949, Mumbai
2.The Deputy General Manager (DGM)
Marketing (Retail) Tamilnadu and Puducherry
Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Southern Regional Office, 1, Renganathan Gardens,
Off.11th main road, PB 1212 & 1213
Anna Nagar, Chennai.
3.The Head of Territory Office,
Bharath Petroleum Corporation Ltd.,
Tamilnadu Retail, BG, Goodshed Road
Thachanallur
Tirunelveli 627 358. ... Appellant
v.
J.Sivaranjani ... Respondent
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
WA(MD). No.2741 of 2024
PRAYER :- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent against
the order of this Court dated 02.07.2024 in WP(MD). No.9954/2024.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Natesh Raaja
For Respondent : M/s.Lakshmi Gopinathan for
M/s.Polax Legal Solutions
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by J.NISHA BANU,J.)
The writ appeal is directed against the order of the writ Court dated
02.07.2024 in WP(MD) No.9954 of 2024.
2. The respondents in the writ petition are the appellant herein.
3. The writ appeal is directed against the order of the writ Court in
allowing the case of the writ petitioner, wherein a direction was issued to
the appellants herein to allot the petroleum retail outlet for the writ
petitioner. Challenging the said direction, the appellants are before this
Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
4. The writ petition was filed by the respondent/writ petitioner
against the rejection of the application made by her for petroleum outlet
dealership in the petition mentioned location.
5. The case of the respondent/writ petitioner before the writ Court
is that she being the sole applicant had applied for BPCL retail outlet in
the petition mentioned location. For the retail outlet, as per the condition,
the applicant should have minimum lease of a land for 19 years and 11
months. However, as on the date of application, the petitioner is having
the lease agreement for 20 years. However, it is the case of the
authorities that on the date of verification, the writ petitioner did not have
any lease hold interest in the petition mentioned land. Therefore, it is
their case that the writ petitioner is not entitled for the dealership to be
granted in her favour.
6. The writ Court, however, held that as per the rectification deed,
the petitioner had the lease hold interest with effect from 26.09.2023.
However, in the earlier lease deed, it was mentioned as if the
commencement of the lease was with effect from 21.10.2023. The lease
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
was executed on 26.09.2023 and it has come into force with effect from
21.10.2023. However, the payment of lease rent fixed is commencing
from 01.10.2023. Since it is purely a typographical error, a rectification
deed was executed on 10.01.2024 and in the rectification deed, it has
been mentioned that the date 21.10.2023 shall be read as 26.09.2023, ie.,
the date of application. Since the parties have clarified through the
rectification deed that the date of commencement of lease is from
26.09.2023 and not from 21.10.2023, it is deemed that as on the date of
application, the petitioner is holding the lease hold right of the petition
mentioned land from 26.09.2023. Hence, it is rightly held by the writ
Court by applying the doctrine of related back, that the writ petitioner
had the lease hold right from the date of application, ie., on 26.09.2023.
7. In view of the said application of doctrine of related back, the
writ Court had held that the writ petitioner is entitled to the retail outlet
allotment by taking into account the lease hold right from 26.09.2023
based on the rectification deed. It is also brought to the notice of this
Court that the possession of the lease hold property had also been handed
over to the writ petitioner. Hence, the writ Court had rightly allowed the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
writ petition, which, in the considered view of this Court, does not
warrant any interference. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed.
No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[J.N.B.,J] [S.S.Y.,J]
13.03.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
RR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
J.NISHA BANU, J
AND
S.SRIMATHY, J.
RR
ORDER
IN
Date : 13/03/2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 22/04/2025 05:06:04 pm )
