S PERIYASAMY @ MARUNTHU PERIYASAMY Vs. COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE; JOINT COMMISSIONER HINDU RELIGIOUS AND CHARITABLE; R RAM SUNDAR HEREDITARY TRUSTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner claiming to be a lessee under the third respondent, the hereditary trustee of Arulmigu Varadaraja Perumal Thiru Koil, has filed this writ petition to quash the Order, dated 26.02.2014, passed by the first respondent the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department, by which the petitioner's revision petition filed under Section 21 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959 (Tamil Nadu Act 22 of 1959) [hereinafter, it may be referred to as 'the Act'] was dismissed.

(2.) The petitioner would state that he is a lessee under the third respondent in respect of the property, comprised in S.F.No.287 of Vairichettipalayam, Thuraiyur Taluk, Thiruchirappalli District, measuring an extent of 7 Acres 61 Cents, since 2002. It is further stated that the third respondent leased out the property to one Annamalai and the said Annamalai was unable to cultivate land. The petitioner approached the third respondent expressing his willingness to cultivate the said land and the third respondent is said to have paid a sum of Rs.3,45,000/- and handed over the possession of the said land to the petitioner during 2002 on a lease rent of Rs.4,000/- per annum. The petitioner would further state that though the third respondent assured that he would record the petitioner's name as a tenant and execute a lease deed, the same was not done by the third respondent. But, the petitioner continued to be in possession of the land and effected improvements after obtaining loan from the Cooperative Bank and the petitioner has also discharged the loan during 2006.

(3.) Further, the learned counsel would submit that the third respondent filed a suit in O.S.No.711 of 2003, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Trichy, as against the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and that the third respondent admitted in the plaint that the property was in the possession of the petitioner. Fearing forcible eviction, the petitioner filed a suit in O.S.No.67 of 2012, on the file of the District Munsif Court, Thuraiyur, as against the third respondent and in the meantime the petitioner approached the revenue authorities for recording his name as a tenant in respect of the said land and the case is pending before the Tahsildar, Thuraiyur, in T.R. No.4 of 2012.