Madras HC refuses to grant relief to Amrutanjan in rent case

Balm maker has been paying Rs 1.4K rent for 14 grounds for over 100 years.

Madras High Court. (File photo | Express)

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has refused to grant relief to the popular pain relief balm makers, Amrutanjan Limited, in the case over rental arrears of Rs 9.74 crore it owed to the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (HR&CE) department by way of occupying 14 grounds and 910 sq ft of land belonging to the Kapaleeswarar temple in Mylapore.

An appeal filed by the company, against a single judge’s order upholding the department’s powers to insist upon pre-deposit of the lease rent fixed or re-fixed by the department to hear the appeal under Section 34 A (5) of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, was dismissed by the first bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari on Monday.

Upholding the single judge’s order, the bench said, “As rightly observed by the single judge, if the plea of the appellant that the condition mandating pre-deposit is onerous is accepted, then the religious institutions, which heavily depend on such rental income would not be able to maintain the properties and fulfil the religious duties.”

That apart, as noted in the order passed by the single judge, the appellant (Amrutanjan) has been in occupation of 14 grounds and 910 sq ft by paying a paltry rent of Rs 1,400 for more than a century, the bench pointed out.

It found fault with the appellant for challenging the provision empowering the department to insist on pre-deposit for entertaining appeal even after participating in the proceedings of the department.

Special Government Pleader N R R Arun Natarajan, appearing for HR&CE department, had submitted that the said extent of land was given on a 99-year lease to one P R Sundera Iyer in 1901 and he had assigned the rights to Amrutanjan which had been paying a rent of just Rs 1,400. After issuing a notice for enhanced rent, the tenancy was terminated with effect from October 31, 2001, and was directed to vacate the land.

Later, the company filed a writ petition in 2005. The orders on the petition were passed after about 20 years — on September 25, 2025 — by the single judge.