K B VISWANATHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER AND ESTATE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr.R.Muthukumaraswamy, learned Senior Counsel leading Mr.A.Jenasenan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.Nos.18710 of 2009 and 18768 to 18782 of 2009 Mr.J.Karunanithi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.18783 of 2009 and Mr.P.Wilson, learned Additional Advocate General leading Mr.G.T.Subramanian, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent - Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai in all these petitions.

(2.) THIS batch of writ petitions arises out of a common order passed by the second respondent - Principal Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, dated 17.8.2009 in various appeals filed by the petitioners. The petitioners are all carrying on business in timber and are having their timber depot in Basin Bridge Road, Chennai-79 coming under Division 51, Zone V, V.O.C.Nagar area. The petitioners were issued with the Notice of Eviction by the first respondent - Commissioner and Estate Officer, Corporation of Chennai, dated 14.5.2009 asking them to be evicted from the premises occupied by them.

(3.) THE Appellate Authority, viz., the second respondent, after numbering their appeals and after hearing both sides, passed the impugned order. THE second respondent has held that the petitioners are not direct lessees and under Section 75 of the CCMC Act, the Commissioner of Chennai Corporation has no power to grant any lease in their favour. In case any sanction is to be made for executing such lease, it has to be done by the Commissioner only with the sanction of the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation either for grant or extension of lease and, therefore, in the matter of grant of lease or licence, there cannot be any presumption and in the present case in terms of Section 75, they have no lease in their favour. Once the petitioners are not lessees, then any amount paid by them is not a lease rent, but it can only be a payment other than rent.