The Madras City Tenants’ Protection Act's provisions on tenant rights do not apply to properties held by religious charities; rights can be extinguished retrospectively by legislative amendments.

ORDER :

D.Bharatha Chakravarthy, J.

A. Prelude:

This Transferred City Tenant Original Petition (TCTOP) arises out of O.P.No.139 of 1979, in O.S.No.224 of 1979.

1.1 On 09.07.1979, the said suit was filed with the reliefs directing the defendants to vacate and surrender the possession of the suit property and for consequential reliefs. Admittedly, the tenancy is only concerning land and the original first petitioner/tenant had put up superstructures.

1.2 The present original petition was filed by the first petitioner/tenant under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants’ Protection Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), with a prayer to direct the respondent/landlord to sell the vacant land described in the schedule to the petition being part of the suit property to the petitioners 3, 6 and 7/tenants in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

1.3 Since the year 1979, the matters were kept pending and in the connected Civil Revision Petition (MD) No.1050 of 2023, this Court passed a detailed order on 10.07.2024, withdrawing the suit as well as the present TCTOP to the file of this Court. The said Order may be read as part and parcel of this order. The TCTOP was transferred and re-numbered as TCTOP (MD) No.1 of 2024 and the same is taken up for further hearing and disposal.

1.4 When the matter came up for hearing, both sides learned counsel submitted that even though the above-connected Civil Revision Petition was filed regarding an interlocutory order regarding the recall of P.W.1, both sides have already let in evidence and their respective evidence on record. They do not press further prayers of recalling the PW-1 and submitted that for both sides no further evidence needed be let in the TCTOP and as such, the present TCTOP is taken up for disposal by way of this order.

B. The Case of the Petitioners:-

2. A careful handling and perusal of the decrepit papers of the present case reveals that the petition was filed by the original petitioner/tenant – K.M.Sanjeevi Raja, which is being continued and pursued by his legal heirs. The property described in the petition is a vacant site belonging to the respondent/landlord. The same was leased to the original first petitioner, in 1945 for the purposes of putting up superstructure and installation of rice, flour and oil mills, and boilers. The deceased first petitioner had put up rice, flour, oil mills and boiler plants on the premises constructed a compound wall and erected platforms and a shed in the southern portion of the suit property. The value of the superstructure construction is over Rs.2 lakhs. The original rent for the premises, i.e., the vacant site was Rs.140/- per annum and it has been periodically enhanced to Rs.960/- per annum. The rents are being collected every year. It is not a case of monthly tenancy. The business is the only source of livelihood for the deceased first petitioner and his family. The entire vacant land is absolutely necessary for the deceased first petitioner for the purpose of rice, flour and oil mills. The existing platform is not sufficient for drying the boiled rice and keeping the bags. The small front portion in the south abutting Tenkasi Road is also necessary and is used as the entrance for loading and unloading.

2.1 There is a Well on the north side of the petition property. The Well is part of the Nandavanam of the respondent. As an amenity for convenient enjoyment of the demised premises and for the purpose of the boiling rice, water from the Well was taken by the deceased first petitioner and the charges for water being paid and the rates being fixed according to the convenience of the respondent. The charges for supply of water at