S.Lalitha Bai v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Order The petitioner has filed this petition to direct the 4th and 5th respondents to de-seal the premises.

¶2Case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's brother one Prithiviraj was tenant of land comprised in S.F.NO.328/4, Door No.2, Thiru Vi Ka Salai, Whites Road, 2nd Lane, Chennai 600 014, admeasuring 1947 sq.ft. The said land belongs to the 5th respondent Temple. Thereafter the said Prithiviraj transferred his tenancy to the petitioner and he used the said property / godown to store tyres. The petitioner also approached the respondents for change of name in respect of tenancy. While so, the 5th respondent Temple issued a notice dated

15.04.2004 in the name of petitioner's deceased brother, calling upon to pay revised rent of Rs.7508/- per month, against which, the petitioner has initiated legal proceedings. In the interregnum, on 05.05.2009, the 3rd respondent herein issued a show cause notice observing the petitioner as an encroacher. In the said show cause notice, the extent of property was wrongly stated as 2237 sq.ft, for which, the petitioner has also sent a reply on 18.11.2009. Thereafter also, the petitioner has received summons from the 3rd respondent on the said show cause Page3 of 6 notice for enquiry. The petitioner appeared and attended the enquiry and he undertook to pay the reasonable rent as per the Government Order. However, the 3rd respondent has rejected his explanation and declared him as an encroacher. At this juncture on 28.02.2023, the officials of respondents 4 and 5 visited the godown and without any prior notice, sealed the godown, for which, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent and it is pending. Aggrieved by the sealing of the premises, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

¶3Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the petitioner undertook and voluntarily paid differential amounts assessed towards the rent based on the Government Orders issued from time to time in order to establish her bonafide in her attempt for fixation of fair rent, sudden sealing of premises has caused serious prejudice to the livelihood of the petitioner and hence, prays for appropriate orders.

¶4The petitioner also appeared before this Court. When this Court raised a query as to the arrear amount towards the rent, the petitioner herself admitted a sum of Rs.20 lakhs as arrears.

¶5However, learned Special Government Pleader (HR &CE) submitted that the total arrear amount towards rent is around Rs.60 lakhs. In order to settle Page4 of 6 the issue amicably between the parties, he has no objection for the admitted amount of Rs.20,00,000/- being paid by the petitioner.

¶6This Court heard the petitioner in person, the counsel appearing for the respondents and also perused the materials available on record.

¶7Facts of the case is that for non payment of rental arrears, the respondents had initiated Section 78 proceedings against the petitioner and demanded a sum of Rs.60,00,000/- as arrears and sealed the premises by taking the possession. The petitioner has admitted arrears of Rs.20 lakhs and undertaken to pay amount to the tune of Rs.20,00,000/- in full quit. In order to give quietus to the issue, this Court directs the petitioner to pay the admitted amount of Rs.20,00,000/- in favour of the 5th respondent Temple within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In default, the petitioner shall pay interest @ 24% on the aforesaid amount of Rs.20 lakhs from the date on which the amount fell due. On receipt of the aforesaid amount within the time prescribed above, the 5th respondent Temple is directed to de-seal the premises so as to enable the petitioner to remove his belongings. The respondents have already taken possession and therefore, they are directed not to initiate any further proceedings against the petitioner, subject to receipt of the aforesaid amount. Page5 of 6

¶8The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 03-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SK To

¶1The Secretary to Govt., Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 09

¶2The commissioner Hr and CE Department, 119 Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34

¶3The Joint commissioner II Hr and CE Department, TNSCB Complex, 2nd Floor, R.K.Mutt road, Chennai 4

¶4The Assistant Commissioner Hr and CE Department, No. 128 Yadaval Street, 2nd floor, PAdi, Chennai 50

¶5The Executive officer Arulmighu Rathina Vinayagar and Durgai Amman Temple Whites road, Royapettah, Chennai 14 Page6 of 6 M.DHANDAPANI J. sk 03-03-2026

Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI S.Lalitha Bai W/o. Subash Chand, No.2, Whites road II Lane, Royapettah, Chennai 14 ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Govt., Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department, Fort St.George, Chennai 09 2. The commissioner Hr and CE Department, 119 Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Nungambakkam, Chennai 34 3. The Joint commissioner II Hr and CE Department, TNSCB Complex, 2nd Floor, R.K.Mutt road, Chennai 4 4. The Assistant Commissioner Hr and CE Department, No. 128 Yadaval Street, 2nd floor, PAdi, Chennai 50 5. The Executive officer Arulmighu Rathina Vinayagar and Durgai Amman Temple Whites road, Royapettah, Chennai 14 ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of writ of Mandamus directing the 4th and 5th respondents to de-seal the premises comprised in Survey No. 328/4 , Door No.2, Thiru Vi Ka Salai, Whites road II Lane, Chennai 14 admeasuring 1531 sq.ft pending disposal of the appeal in R.P . No. 34/15 on the file of the 1st respondent Page2 of 6 For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Sunil Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Spl.Gp. Hr & Ce For R1 to R5