Murugesan vs. The Commissioner
Facts
The petitioner, Murugesan, is a lessee of a shop (Shop No.N-11, 102 sq. ft.) in the Tirunelveli Corporation bus stand. The initial rent was Rs. 63,365/- for a three-year lease from 2021, subject to a 15% enhancement every nine years. When 60 new shops opened, the respondents orally directed shopkeepers, including the petitioner, to pay a revised rent of Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. The petitioner and others refused to execute bonds accepting this revised rent. An eviction order was subsequently issued on 17.05.2022. After a legal challenge that reached the Supreme Court, the rent was reduced to Rs. 140/- per sq. ft., with directions for shopkeepers to furnish undertakings. Despite this, the petitioner received a Demand Notice dated 29.07.2025 from the Assistant Commissioner demanding arrears of rent at Rs. 621/- per sq. ft.
Held
The Court held that the Demand Notice dated 29.07.2025 issued by the Assistant Commissioner was in direct violation of the Supreme Court's order dated 13.12.2023. The Supreme Court had directed the rent to be refixed at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. based on the representation made by the Municipal Corporation itself and the willingness of the petitioners to pay this rate, subject to furnishing an undertaking. The Court found that the current demand was contrary to this binding order. The Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned Demand Notice, and directed the respondents to refix the rent at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. per month as per the Supreme Court's direction. Furthermore, the Court ordered the adjustment of any excess rental amount collected from the petitioner towards future rent payable. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Demand Notice dated 29.07.2025 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, demanding rent at Rs. 621/- per sq. ft., is in violation of the Supreme Court's order dated 13.12.2023, which directed the rent to be refixed at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft.? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contended that the demand notice is in direct contravention of the Supreme Court's order, which had fixed the rent at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. based on the Corporation's own representation and the willingness of the shopkeepers to match this reduced rate. The petitioner also relied on a High Court judgment in a similar matter (W.P.(MD) No. 21972 of 2025, etc., batch). The petitioner argued that the respondents have failed to implement the Supreme Court's order. Respondents' arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents against the petitioner's contentions regarding the Supreme Court's order. However, the issuance of the demand notice itself indicates their position.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.11.2025 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA W.P.(MD).No.34481 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.27274 and 27275 of 2025 Murugesan
... Petitioner Vs.
The Commissioner, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli 627 001, Tirunelveli District.
The Assistant Commissioner, Melapalayam Zone, Tirunelveli Corporation, Tirunelveli 627001, Tirunelveli District.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the Demand Notice dated 29.07.2025 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to refix the rent at the rate of Rs.140/- per sq.ft. per month as directed by the Honble Supreme Court of India in respect of other shopkeepers in the order dated 13.12.2023 passed in SLP(C) No. 1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 27248-27249 of 2023, to be paid by the petitioner, within a time limit to be fixed by this Honble Court and pass such further or other orders as thi
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madras High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.