CHENNAI: Refusing to pass any interim orders in the case filed by J Deepak, nephew of former Chief Minister Jayalalitha challenging the acquisition of her residence Veda Nilayam, Justice Anand Venkatesh of Madras High Court on Thursday referred it to a division bench.
In his plea, Deepak sought the keys of Veda Nilayam saying the house was used for celebrating several functions and family events, and his aunt Jayalalitha never had any plans of converting the house to a memorial.
The petition also said that they are emotionally and sentimentally attached to the house and have plans to use it for doing charity through a public trust in her name.
The plea comes a day after the Tamil Nadu government informed the court of its plans to convert a portion of 'Veda Nilayam' into the Chief Minister's official residence.
Deepak also brought it to the notice of the court on the plea of the Poes Garden Residents Welfare Association had also challenged the government's decision. He also said that the state has to take note of his sister and his objections after being declared as rightful heirs by the High Court. The move by the government, Deepak said, is in total violation of the principles of natural justice as mandated by the Land Acquisition Act, 2013.
The petitioner sought an interim stay on the state government's decision to acquire the property.
The Tamil Nadu government in its reply denied the submissions made by the petitioner and said that notices were issued to both Deepa and Deepa.
During the property acquisition proceedings, Deepa and Deepak had sought for clarification in Income Tax proceedings that are pending.
Justice Anand Venkatesh, who heard the plea, recorded the submissions and refused to grant an interim stay.
The judge observed that there is already a case pending regarding the Veda Nilayam property with a division bench of the Madras High Court. The division bench after declaring Deepak and Deepa as the rightful legal heirs had sought for a compliance report to be filed on the formation of a trust within 8 weeks, he added.
"To avoid any contradicting orders by two different benches of the court, the court refers this matter to the division bench" it observed.