w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Narendra Raj (Madhu Card) & Others v/s The Chairman/Managing Director, Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board, (CMWSSB), Chennai & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- RAJ CORPORATION LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74900UP2008PLC035742

Company & Directors' Information:- RAJ COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74999PB1949PTC000515

Company & Directors' Information:- NARENDRA AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1997PTC087549

Company & Directors' Information:- G RAJ & COMPANY PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U67120WB1993PTC058140

Company & Directors' Information:- R M RAJ AND CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1952PTC002146

Company & Directors' Information:- NARENDRA CO PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U05190KA1980PTC003946

Company & Directors' Information:- NARENDRA AND NARENDRA (INDIA) LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74992RJ1997PLC013721

Company & Directors' Information:- RAJ & RAJ PVT. LTD. [Active] CIN = U51109WB1991PTC052055

Company & Directors' Information:- K K S WATER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U52100WB2014PTC199844

Company & Directors' Information:- OF WATER PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51909MH2018PTC317142

Company & Directors' Information:- F & G SUPPLY PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U51900DL2012PTC239188

Company & Directors' Information:- T. G. S. WATER PRIVATE LIMITED [Strike Off] CIN = U51109DL2010PTC205948

Company & Directors' Information:- WATER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74990DL2016PTC298912

    W.P. Nos. 28395 to 28397, 28966 & 31790 of 2017 & W.M.P. Nos. 30491, 30492, 30493, 31179 & 34933 of 2017

    Decided On, 20 November 2020

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU

    For the Petitioner: P. Sidharthan, P.B. Balaji, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1 & R2, M. Jothikumar, Standing Counsel, R3, No Appearance, R4 & R5, V. Suryasankar, R5, P. Kannan Kumar, Advocate.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to impugned demand notice CMC No.10/141/04018/000, 07/09/2017 on the file of the Second Respondent and quash the same.)Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to impugned demand notice CMC No.10/141/04018/000, 07/09/2017 on the file of the Second Respondent and quash the same.Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to impugned demand notice CMC No.10/141/04018/000, 07/09/2017 on the file of the Second Respondent and quash the same.Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to impugned demand notice CMC No.10/141/04018/000, 07/09/2017 on the file of the Second Respondent and quash the same.Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned notice dated 07.09.2017 in CMC No.10/141/04018/000, on the file of the Second Respondent and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently forbearing First and Second Respondents, their men, employees, subordinates, agents or any other persons claiming or acting through or under them, from effecting any disconnection to the Petitioner's shops at No. 9 and 10, South Usman Road, being Part of Old Door No.1, Damodara Reddy Street, and also bearing Door No. 3/1, New No.3/1AL, T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.)Common Order1. Heard Mr. P.Sidharthan, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners in W.P. Nos. 28395 to 28397 and 28966 of 2017, Mr. P.B.Balaji, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner in W.P. No. 31790 of 2017, Mr. M.Jothikumar, Learned Standing Counsel for the First and Second Respondents in W.P. Nos. 28395 to 28397 and 28966 of 2017 and W.P. No. 31790 of 2017, Mr. V.Suryasankar, Learned Counsel for the Fourth and Fifth Respondents in all Writ Petitions and Mr. P.Kannan Kumar, Learned Counsel for the Sixth Respondent in W.P. No. 31790 of 2017 and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.2. According to the Petitioners, the building located at No.9, South Usman Road, T.Nagar, Chennai - 17 has 9 shops and the Petitioners are in occupation one shop each as tenants. Since the owner of the premises failed to pay the sewerage and water tax amounting to Rs. 19,43,438/- for the period from II/ 1999-2000 to I/2017-18 and metered water charges of Rs. 35,917/- for the period from May - 2007 to August - 2010, each of the Petitioners were issued separate notices dated 07.09.2017 calling upon them as occupiers of the premises to pay the said amounts, which is challenged in these Writ Petitions.3. The grievance sought to be ventilated by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners in these Writ Petitions is that each of the Petitioners cannot be called upon to pay the entire amount of arrears and that their liability would have to be confined in proportion to the extent of the actual area in the building occupied by them. There is substantial force in the said contention.4. It is also brought to notice that the compliance of the interim orders passed by this Court in these Writ Petitions, the Petitioners have paid substantial part of the amounts demanded in the impugned notices which should be taken into account.5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions made, the impugned notices are set aside and the matters are remitted to the Second Respondent for fresh determination of the extent of liability of each of the Petitioners in proportion to the extent of the actual area in the building occupied by them. In this regard, an inspection of the entire building shall be conducted and the extent of the area occupied by each of the Petitioners shall be ascertained and the arrears due shall be apportioned amongst the Petitioners on that basis and fresh orders of demand shall thereafter be raised to each of the Petitioners aft

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

er deducting the payments that have been made by the respective Petitioners so far. Though obvious, it is made clear that the Petitioners are not precluded from seeking reimbursement of the amounts paid to the Second Respondent, if they are otherwise eligible, from the owner of the property in the manner recognized by law.Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are disposed on the aforesaid terms. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition are closed. No costs.
O R