Misuse of statutory powers and caution against eviction attempts under the guise of building demolition.

R. SUBRAMANIAN, J.

1. This intra Court Appeal is at the instance of the 4th respondent in WP No.9604 of 2015. The said Writ Petition was filed by the 1st respondent herein seeking a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 and 3 herein to take action to demolish the subject building exercising their powers under Section 258 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919.

The brief facts that led to the filing of the Writ Petition are as follows:

2. The 1st respondent herein claims that he along with his wife had purchased the property in question, under four Registered Sale Deeds dated 01.08.2014 and 22.08.2014. The property is situated in Netaji Subash Chandra Bose Road, George Town, Chennai, having an extent of 1995 sq.ft. The same is in possession of the respondents 3 and 4 who are tenants of the vendor of the 1st respondent. After the purchase, it appears, that the 1st respondent had filed RCOP Nos.305 & 306 of 2015, against the tenants viz. the appellant herein and the 4th respondent. Even during the pendency of the said Rent Control Original Petitions, the 1st respondent had come forward with the above Writ Petition, seeking a direction to the Chennai Corporation to exercise its powers under Section 258 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, and take action to demolish the building.

3. The Writ Petition was resisted by the respondents particularly the tenants contending that this Writ Petition itself is a short cut method adopted by the 1st respondent, who claims to be the purchaser of the property from the erstwhile owners in the year 2014, to evict the tenants. The tenants being statutory tenants entitled to protection under the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act and cannot be evicted except by following the procedure prescribed under the said Act. In fact, Section 10 of the said Act provides that no tenant of a building shall be evicted, whether in execution of a decree or otherwise except in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 or Sections 14 to 16 of the said enactment.

4. The appellant and the 4th respondent would also contend that the building is not in a dilapidated condition or is there an imminent threat to the passers by or to the occupiers of the building. The 3rd respondent herein, viz. the Executive Engineer of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation, filed a report pending the Writ Petition. Surprisingly, even during the pendency of the Writ Petition, the 2nd respondent, viz. the Commissioner issued a notice purportedly under Section 258 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, on 20.11.2015. The said notice reads as follows:

“The structure at Door No.180, N.S.C.Bose Road, George Town, Chennai 600 003 is deemed by the undersigned to be in a ruinous state / dangerous to passersby / to the occupiers of the neighboring structure. Therefore you the owner / occupier is required to fence off, take down, secure or repair the above mentioned structure so as to be prevent any danger there from within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this notice, failing which the undersigned himself will fence off, take down, secure or repair such (Structure) or fence off a part of any street or take such temporary measures as the thinks fit to prevent danger and the cost of doing so shall be recoverable from the owner or occupier in the matter provided in Section 387 of MCMC Act IV of 1919.”

5. The learned Single Judge, who heard the Writ Petition, refused to issue a Writ of Mandamus as prayed for. Taking note of the fact that the 1st respondent had already approached the Competent Court seeking relief of eviction, the learned Single Judge, however, observed that it is open to the Corporation to take action if circumstances for invoking the provision of Section 258 existed in the case on hand. The appellant is aggrieved by that portion of the order which grants a licence to the Chennai Corporation, viz. the respondents 2 and 3 to proceed under Section 258