IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 04.07.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA , CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU WA No.2064 of 2021 and CMP No.13068 of 2021

1. G.Subramaniya Pillai (Died)

2. S.Thulasi Bai

3. S.Vijaya Kumar

4. T.Sumathi

5. S.Suresh Kumar

6. J.Subashini (Appellants 2 to 6 substituted as Legal Representatives of the deceased Sole Appellant vide order of Court dated 12.06.2023 made in CMP.No.12073/2023) ... Appellants -vs-

1. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Nungambakkam High Road, Chennai 600 034.

2. The Executive Officer, Dharmaraja Vembuliamman Devasthanam, Vijaya Vigneswarar Koil Street, Choolai, Chennai 600 112. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 29.01.2020 passed in W.P.No.2487 of 2012 on the file of this Court.

For the Appellants :: Mr.V.Raghupathi For the Respondents :: Mr.N.R.R.Arun Natarajan Special Govt. Pleader for R-1 :: Mr.R.Mahalingam for R-2 * * * * *

JUDGMENT (Delivered by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

The sole appellant, who since died pending the writ appeal, assails the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court thereby dismissing the writ petition filed by him seeking directions against the respondents to execute and register the sale deed in his favour in respect of the property bearing House and Ground Old Door No.93, subsequent Door No.93/2, present Door no.102, Vijaya Vigneswarar Koil Street, Choolai, Chennai. The appeal is prosecuted further by his legal heirs.

2. The learned counsel for the present appellants, who are the legal representatives of the deceased appellant, submits that the deceased appellant had filed an application bearing M.P.No.505 of 1981 in the Ejectment Suit No.30 of 1981 under Section 9 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 (in short 'the Act of 1921') seeking for a direction to the Temple to sell the land for a price fixed through a Commissioner appointed by the Court. In the said application, the Court passed the order fixing the price at Rs.11,740/- and asking the deceased appellant to deposit the amount in 34 monthly instalments of Rs.345/- per month commencing from 15.09.1982. According to the learned counsel for the appellants, the entire amount of instalments has been deposited by the deceased appellant. The sale deed was not executed by the respondents. The learned counsel relies upon the proviso to Section 3 of the Madras City Tenants' Protection (Amendment) Act, 1994 (Tamil Nadu Act 2 of 1996) (in short 'the Amendment Act') to submit that nothing contained in this Section shall be deemed to invalidate any Suit or proceeding in which a decree or order passed has been executed or satisfied in full before the said date. The fact that the entire amount has been deposited by the deceased appellant is a matter of record and is not disputed, inter alia, the decree or order of the Court is satisfied in full.

The said aspect has not been considered by the learned Single Judge.

3. We have heard the learned counsels for the respondents also. 4. It is a fact that the deceased appellant had deposited the 34 instalments as directed by the Small Causes Court, Chennai. However, the learned Judge did not record his satisfaction in full nor the sale deed was executed nor the deceased appellant filed an application for execution of the order/decree.

5. The obligation of the deceased appellant does not rest after depositing the instalments. As per Section 9(3)(a) of the Act of 1921, on payment of the price fixed under Clause (b) of Sub-Section (1), the Court has to pass an order directing the conveyance by the landlord to the tenant of the extent of the land for which the said price was fixed. The Court shall, by the same order, direct the landlord to put the tenant into possession of the remaining extent of the land, if any, and the stamp duty and registration fee in respect of such conveyance shall be borne by the tenant. A