← Library
Madras High CourtWP/49391/2025disposed of

Mrs.Shahida Aleem v. The Branch Manager

2026-01-02Honourable Mr.Justice D.Bharatha Chakravarthy4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 02-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY and W.M.P.No.55173 of 2025 Shahida Aleem Petitioner Vs

1. The Branch Manager LIC of India, Vaniyambadi Branch, No.1, 0/1A, C.N.A. Road, Vaniyambadi, Tamil Nadu.

2.The Branch Manager, HDFC Bank, No.100, 142, 14th Street, Secretariat Colony, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.

3.Sameera Aftab, Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to recognise the petitioner as sole and lawful lessor of the premises situated at No.1,0/1A, C,N,A Road, Vaniyambadi in terms of the Will dated 22.02.2010 in Doc.No. 23/2010 executed by deceased husband and thereby enter into all tenancy-related transactions exclusively with the petitioner and to forthwith deposit all further rents exclusively into the bank account specified by the petitioner, and restraining the first respondent from depositing rent into any account not authorised by her.

For Petitioner:

Mr.A.Suresh For R2:

Mr.C.Mohan assisted by Ms.A.Rexy Josephine Mary for M/s.King & Patridge

ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the first respondent to recognise the petitioner as the sole and lawful lessor of the premises situated at No.1, 01/A, C.N.A.Road, Vaniyambadi, in terms of the Will dated 22.02.2010 registered as Document No.23 of 2010, executed by the petitioner's deceased husband.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and perusing the material records of the case, including the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the second respondent, it can be seen that the dispute is between the petitioner and the third respondent, her daughter. It is the case of the petitioner that as per the registered Will, she has got a life estate to enjoy the rents. However, her daughter is now preventing her from operating the joint account opened with the second respondent bank and the petitioner is not permitted to operate the said bank account. The first respondent, LIC of India, being the tenant, ought not to have deposited the rent in the said account and instead should have deposited the rent in the erstwhile account to which the petitioner has access.

3. Upon considering the above, it can be seen that when the dispute is private in nature between the petitioner and her daughter, who is said to have unlawfully prevented the petitioner from enjoying the rents, the remedy of the petitioner lies either in approaching the concerned Civil Court to establish her title over the property or the appropriate Rent Control Court, if in spite of her being the landlord, rent is not paid to her.

4. With the said liberties kept open, this writ petition stands disposed of. Needless to mention that since the petitioner claims to be a senior citizen aged about 83 years, as and when any such petition is filed, the Court concerned shall treat it as expeditiously as possible. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

02-01-2026 nsl To The Branch Manager LIC of India, Vaniyambadi Branch, No.1, 0/1A, C.N.A. Road, Vaniyambadi, Tamil Nadu.

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY J.

nsl 02-01-2026