Chettinad Charitable Trust, represented by its trustee and renowned industrialist A.C. Muthiah,76, has filed a civil suit in the Madras High Court accusing industrialist M.A.M.R. Muthiah, 48, of having “falsely, fraudulently, cunningly and clandestinely” created records to lease out the iconic Chettinad House spread over eight acres of land in the heart of the city at Raja Annamalaipuram.
When the suit was listed for admission before Justice R. Subramanian on Friday, the judge recused from hearing the case without citing any reason and directed the High Court Registry to list it before some other judge. As per the standing orders issued by Chief Justice Vijaya Kamlesh Tahilramani, the suit, along with an application seeking interim orders, would now be listed before Justice R. Suresh Kumar next week.
In an affidavit filed in support of his suit, Mr. Muthiah said the trust was created by virtue of a deed executed by Raja Sir M.A. Muthiah Chettiar on March 29, 1972. The deed stipulates that the Chettinad House be used for charitable purposes such as running educational institutions, hospitals, creches, dispensaries and orphanages besides providing relief for the poor and awarding scholarships and stipends to students.
‘Adoption illegal’
The propounder of the trust co-opted his son M.A.M. Ramasamy as a co-trustee of the trust. Thereafter, Mr. Ramasamy co-opted his cousin, the present plaintiff, as another trustee on September 30, 1991 and died on December 2, 2015. In the meantime, the present defendant in the suit was reportedly adopted by Mr. Ramasamy though such adoption was illegal and invalid, the plaintiff claimed.
The supposed adoption was against the well established customs of Nattukottai Chettiar community and “hence he is not the adopted son of M.A.M. Ramasamy,” the affidavit read.
It also went on to state that Mr. Ramasamy had co-opted the defendant as one of the trustees. Since such co-option was not done with the consent of the plaintiff, the defendant would have no right whatsoever to be claim to be a trustee, it added.
Yet, the defendant went about creating a “false” document as if he had co-opted his wife Geetha Muthiah as another trustee on December 7, 2015 and utilising that document he had made her give authority to M. Ramanathan, having office at Rani Seethai Hall in Anna Salai, to execute a deed as if the Chettinad House was being given on lease to the defendant for 20 years for a paltry rent of ₹50,000 per month and on payment of security deposit of ₹10 lakh.
Claiming that he came to know of the lease deed only on November 29, 2018, the plaintiff sought to restrain the defendant and his wife from demolishing or altering the suit property beyond redeem. “If that is done, the utility of the building and its structural soundness and strength will diminish. The building is also old. Irreparable loss and injury will be occasioned to the applicant,” Mr. Muthiah stated in his affidavit.