P.Thirumalai Murugan vs. The Commissioner

Facts

The petitioner, P. Thirumalai Murugan, leased a shop from the Tirunelveli Corporation. The rent was initially fixed at Rs. 7,050/- per month, subject to a 15% enhancement every nine years. The lease was renewed in 2016. Following construction of new shops, the respondents orally directed shopkeepers to pay rent at par with the new shops, initially demanding Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. plus an additional security deposit of Rs. 1,00,000/-. The petitioner challenged an eviction order, which was allowed, but the appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench. Subsequently, the Supreme Court, in SLP (C) Nos. 27248–27249 and 27739–27756 of 2023, directed the rent to be refixed at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft., subject to the petitioner furnishing an undertaking. Despite this, the respondents issued a Demand Notice dated 15.07.2025, demanding arrears at Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. and an enhanced rate of Rs. 258.75 per sq. ft.

Held

The Court held that the Demand Notice dated 15.07.2025 issued by the second respondent is in violation of the order passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in its order dated 13.12.2023 in SLP (C) Nos. 27248–27249 of 2023, had fixed the rent at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. This rate was established based on a representation made by the first respondent itself, acknowledging that they could not secure tenants willing to pay the demanded lease rate of Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. Therefore, any demand contrary to this Supreme Court order is unsustainable. The Court also noted that the petitioner had agreed to furnish an undertaking to pay rent at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. within three weeks, as per the Supreme Court's direction, and was not to be dispossessed. The Court further directed that the excess rental amount collected from the petitioner during the period from January 2022 to May 2025 should be adjusted towards future rent payable by the petitioner. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Demand Notice dated 15.07.2025 issued by the second respondent, demanding rent at Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. and an enhanced rate of Rs. 258.75 per sq. ft., is in violation of the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 13.12.2023 in SLP (C) Nos. 27248–27249 of 2023, which fixed the rent at Rs. 140/- per sq. ft.? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the Demand Notice is in direct contravention of the Supreme Court's order, which mandated a rent of Rs. 140/- per sq. ft. They contended that the respondents have been forcibly collecting Rs. 225/- per sq. ft. and that the Supreme Court's order was based on a representation made by the first respondent itself. The petitioner also relied on a judgment of this Court in a similar matter. Respondents' arguments: The respondents did not record any specific arguments against the petitioner's claim regarding the Supreme Court's order. The judgment notes that the Supreme Court fixed the rate of rent based on the representation made by the first respondent.