JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to allow the above writ appeal by setting aside the order passed by the learned Judge dated 30.11.2020 made in W.M.P.No.6967 of 2020 in W.P.No.5947 of 2020, on the file of this Court thereby allow the allow the writ miscellaneous petition as prayed for.)

Original Side Appeals filed under Order XXXVI Rule 9 of Original Side Rules 8 read with Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal to allow the above original side appeal by setting aside the order passed by the learned judge dated 30.11.2020 made in O.A.No.26 of 2019 in C.S.No.31 of 2019, on the file of this Court thereby allow the original application as prayed for.)

Common Judgment:

Sunder Mohan, J.

1. The appellant has preferred the above Appeals challenging the common order passed in O.A.No.26 of 2019 in C.S.No.31 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.6967 of 2020 in W.P.No.5947 of 2020 dated 30.11.2020.

2. The appellant filed a suit in C.S.No.31 of 2019 praying for permanent injunction restraining the respondent in O.S.A.No.159 of 2021 from taking a unilateral decision with respect to leasehold lands or proceeding with the construction of the club house or any other development on the Cosmo-TNGF Golf Course established on the Joint Lease hold land of the appellant and the respondent. The appellant also filed two applications in the said Suit in O.A.No.26 of 2019 praying for interim injunction, restraining the respondent in any way proceeding with the construction of the club house or any other development on the Joint Lease hold land-Golf Course of the appellant and the respondent and in the said suit filed an application in O.A.No.11 of 2020 praying for an interim injunction restraining the respondents from pursuing 5th respondent's applications for planning permit and building permit with Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority (in short ''CMDA'') with respect to the construction work of the club house or any other development of the Joint Lease hold land.

3. The appellant had also filed W.P.No.5947 of 2020 praying for Writ of Certiorari to quash the planning permission issued by the CMDA in respect of the application filed by the 5th respondent in W.A.No.684 of 2021/respondent in O.S.A.No.159 of 2021. They filed W.M.P.No.6967 of 2020 praying for stay of the planning permission issued by the CMDA. The learned Single Judge, on hearing the above writ petition, felt that, the order passed in O.A.No.11 of 2020 will have a direct bearing on the issues raised in the writ petition and directed the Registry to post the writ petition along with O.A.No.11 of 2020. Accordingly, the Registry, after obtaining appropriate orders from the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, listed the writ petition along with the Applications in the Suit. The learned Single Judge, after hearing the arguments, dismissed the Applications and the Writ Miscellaneous Petition filed by the appellant by a common order. The appellant has preferred the above Original Side Appeal and the Writ Appeal aggrieved by the Common order. Both the Appeals were listed before us pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble the Chief Justice.

4. The facts leading to the dispute between the appellant and the respondent in the O.S.A have been elaborately set out in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. We do not propose to repeat the same here, except those that are essential for the purpose of deciding the above appeals. The Appellant and the Respondent are joint lease holders of the suit schedule property. Initially, the Appellant was the lessee of the Government property since 1933. The Government of Tamil Nadu renewed the lease in 1966 for a period of 30 years. Even before the expiry of the lease, both the appellant and the respondent requested the Government to grant lease in their favour. The Government refused to grant lease in favour of the appellant. The Appellant challenged the refusal to renew the lease by way of writ petition. This Court dismissed the Writ Petition an