W.A.No.3420 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 03.03.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

W.A.No.3420 of 2019

The Commissioner

Corporation of Chennai

Ripon Buildings

Chennai-600 003.

.. Appellant

Vs.

1.Besant Nagar Club

New No.21, Old No.12

3^rd Avenue, Besant Nagar

Chennai-600 091

Represented by its President

Mr.V.Karuppan

2.The Secretary

Municipal Administration

Water Supply Department

Fort St. George

Chennai-600 009.

.. Respondents

Prayer:Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the

order dated 26.08.2010 made in W.P.No.11885 of 2010 on the file of this

Court.

1/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.3420 of 2019

For Appellant : Ms.K.Aswini Devi

Standing Counsel for Greater Chennai Corporation

For R1

: Mr.R.Ragavendran

For R2

: Mrs.R.L.Karthika

Government Advocate

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court delivered by V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.)

The present Writ Appeal is filed against the order dated 26.08.2010

passed by this Court in W.P.No.11885 of 2010, whereunder the learned

Single Judge was pleased to allow the Writ Petition quashing the

proceedings of the appellant seeking eviction of the 1^st respondent under the

provisions of the Tamil Nadu Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised

Occupants) Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as “TNPP Act, 1975”).

2. The undisputed case is that an extent of 4 grounds 2230 sq.ft. in

Block No.41, S.No.1 (part) in Oorur Village, 3^rd Avenue, Besant Nagar,

Chennai - 90 belongs to the appellant. The 1^st respondent had taken

possession of the premises in the year 1978 for the purpose of running a

2/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.3420 of 2019

playground. The lease had expired on 21.07.1981. No records have been

produced either side to show that the lease has been extended subsequently.

In the year 1994, the appellant sought to take possession of the premises and

the Writ Petition came to be filed in W.P.No.3536 of 1994. In the said Writ

Petition, the relief sought for was for a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the

Corporation from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of

aforesaid property. On a statement made by the learned counsel for the

Corporation in those proceedings that the lease had been extended, the Writ

Petition came to be allowed. On 23.09.2009, the appellant issued a show

cause notice to the 1^st respondent under the provisions of the TNPP Act,

1975. A reply was sent by the 1^st respondent on 29.09.2009. Final orders

were passed on 19.03.2010 holding that the 1^st respondent is in

unauthorised occupation and it was directed to hand over possession of the

premises within ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. In

default of handing over possession, it was ordered that further proceedings

would be taken under the TNPP Act, 1975.

3/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.3420 of 2019

3. Challenging this order, a Writ Petition was filed by the 1^st

respondent in W.P.No.11885 of 2010.

4. This Writ Petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge on the

following grounds:

(i) The stand taken by the Corporation in the previous Writ Petition

that the lease had been extended runs contrary to the view that the lease had

expired on 21.07.1981.

(ii) Reasons given in the show cause notice and the reasons given in

the impugned order are different.

(iii) Reply given by the 1^st respondent on 29.09.2009 was not

considered.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned

counsel appearing for the respondents reiterated the submissions before they

made before the learned Single Judge. We have carefully considered the

arguments of both sides and gone through the records produced by the

appellant.

4/10

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.No.3420 of 2019

6. It is necessary to refer the provisions of the TNP