Madras High Court
T.T.P.Kadeeja vs The Madras Mahajana Saba
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON PRONOUNCED ON
17.07.2025 08.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
O.A.No.437 of 2025
and A.Nos.2169 & 2587 of 2025
in C.S.No.95 of 2025
O.A.No.437 and A.No.2169 of 2025
T.T.P.Kadeeja ... Applicant/ Plaintiff
Vs
The Madras Mahajana Saba
Represented by its General Secretary
P.Chandrasekar
New No.70, Old No.833, 2nd Floor,
Mount Road, Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondent/ Defendant
In both the applications:
For Applicant : Mr.S.Tanka Sivan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Sriram
A.Nos.2587 of 2025
The Madras Mahajana Saba
Represented by its General Secretary
P.Chandrasekar
New No.70, Old No.833, 2nd Floor,
Mount Road, Chennai – 600 002. ... Applicant / Defendant
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm )
Vs
T.T.P.Kadeeja ... Respondent / Plaintiff
For Applicant : Mr.M.Sriram
For Respondent : Mr.S.Tanka Sivan
COMMON ORDER
The application in O.A.No.437 of 2025 has been filed by the plaintiff, to grant interim injunction not to disturb the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the suit property by the applicant.
2. The application in A.No.2169 of 2025 has been filed by the plaintiff, to permit the applicant to deposit the monthly rent in respect of the suit property.
3. The application in A.No.2587 of 2025 has been filed by the defendant, to vacate the interim stay of dispossession in order dated 24/04/2025 in O.A.No.437 of 2025.
4. Mr.S.Thanka Sivan, learned counsel appearing for the applicant would submit that the husband of the applicant had entered into a registered agreement of lease with the respondent for a period of 27 years with a right for further 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) renewal of 15 years. According to him, the lease was entered for the purpose of demolishing the old structure and putting up a new construction at the cost of the applicant’s husband with a right to earn rental income from the property. The terms of the agreement expressly spells such a right in favour of the husband of the applicant. As per the original lease agreement, the term of lease is to come to an end on 31.11.2024 and that the applicant who was substituted in the place of her husband as a lessee is entitled for a further renewal of the lease for a period of 15 years from 01.12.2024.
5. He would also rely upon the transfer of tenancy entered between the applicant and the respondent on 24.06.2025 which according to him would indicate that the terms of the original lease deed will be valid and complied with by both the parties. In spite of repeated requests to the respondent for renewal of the terms of lease even much before the lease came to an end, the respondent had not heeded to the request made by the applicant. The respondent had caused a notice dated 07.11.2024 terminating the tenancy and had refused to receive the rent. In spite of a suitable reply sent on that behalf insisting for renewal of the tenancy. He would further submit that the respondent had initiated proceedings under Rent Control Act in RLTOP.No.79 of 2025 on the file of the Small Causes Court - X. He would submit that the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) said proceeding is not maintainable as the building had been constructed by the husband of the applicant. He further submitted that he is also entitled to seek protection under the Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act and he is entitled to purchase the property under the said enactment. He would submit that cohesive steps had been taken to dislodge the applicant from the property. He would submit that the applicant had spent all her earnings in the development of the property and if she is unlawfully evicted contrary to the terms of the renewal, it would cause severe prejudice to the applicant and therefore, he seeks indulgence of this Court by injuncting the respondent from interfering with the peaceful possessions and enjoyment of the applicant. He would also pray for a direction to permit the applicant to deposit the monthly rent to the account of the suit as the respondent is refusing to receive the rents.
6. Countering his arguments, Mr.M.Sriram, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent would submit that firstly the suit seeking for specific performance of the rental and lease agreements itself is not maintainable. He would submit that even assuming that there is a valid clause of renewal, the same is not unilateral and is only subject to the terms that had to be arrived at on the expiry of the lease period. Even that the applicant seeks to renew the lease agreement on the very same terms. He would further submit that the 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) Board of the respondent had passed a Resolution to put the property to further the object of the Trust giving up the commercial interest in the property. He would submit that even assuming that the suit is decreed in favour of the applicant, it would not disentitle the respondent from initiating proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenants Act, 2017, for failure of the applicant who is the tenant to comply with the conditions of the tenancy. He would submit that the applicant had been a chronic defaulter and had been evading payment of monthly rent and taxes as per the lease deed and therefore, the respondent is entitled to seek for eviction of the applicant. A decision has also been taken by the General Body of the respondent that the lease should terminate and the space should be put for the benefit of the members and general public. He would submit that the present suit had been initiated to circumvent the proceedings initiated by the respondent before the Rent Controller. Therefore he prays this Court to dismiss the application as being vexatious.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
8. There is no dispute with regard to the ownership of the property with 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) the respondent. The lease that was entered by the respondent with the husband of the applicant is also not disputed. The terms of the lease are also not disputed. Admittedly, the lease deed also contains a clause for renewal which reads as follows:-
“…19) The tenancy shall be renewed at the option of both the parties for a further period of 15 (fifteen) years, on fresh terms and conditions that may be stipulated thereon;…”
9. A reading of the Clause would show that the lease could be renewed for a further period of 15 years on the fresh terms and conditions that may be stipulated. The applicant had sought for the specific performance of the renewal for a period of 15 years on the fair rent that may be fixed by this Court. Fixation of fair rent had been vested with the Rent Control Authorities under the Provisions of the Tamil Nadu Regulation of Rights and Responsibilities of Landlord and Tenants Act, 2017.
10. Even assuming that the applicant succeeds in the suit, if there is a violation of the terms of the lease, then the respondent is entitled for moving the Authorities under the Act for evicting the tenant. The pendency of the proceedings while renewal of lease cannot be a reason to circumvent the 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) proceedings for eviction under the Act. As indicated supra, there has been an admitted relationship of landlord and tenant between the applicant and the respondent. It is also an admitted case that the respondent had refused to receive the rent and recording the same, this Court had also permitted the applicant to deposit the agreed lease rentals to the credit of the suit and she had also deposited the monthly rents till July 2025.
11. In view of the aforesaid findings and reasonings, the following orders are passed.
a) According, the application in O.A.No.437 of 2025 is ordered and the application in A.No.2587 of 2025 stands rejected, but, however the same shall be subject to the proceedings pending in RLTOP No.79 of 2025 on the file of the Small Causes Court-X.
b) The order already passed in A.No.2169 of 2025 is made absolute and the applicant shall continue to deposit the lease rentals as ordered by this Court, in its order dated 24.04.2025 and the same shall be deposited on or before 10th of every succeeding month.
7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) It is made clear that the Court has not injuncted the proceedings in RLTOP.No.79 of 2025 pending on the file of the Small Causes court-X. The suit shall stand posted to 28.08.2025 for further hearing.
08.08.2025.
Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm ) K.KUMARESH BABU., J Gba Pre-Delivery Order in O.A.No.437 of 2025 and A.Nos.2169 & 2587 of 2025 in C.S.No.95 of 2025 08.08.2025 9/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/08/2025 04:26:52 pm )