Facts
The first respondent held a licence to collect fees at the Manapparai Municipality Weekly Cattle Market for 2024–2025.
Source reference: no citationFollowing complaints that he had collected excess fees, the Municipality cancelled his licence by order dated 15 July 2026.
Source reference: p. 3, paras. 5–6He challenged the cancellation in a writ petition.
Source reference: no citationThe Single Judge upheld the cancellation but directed a refund of ₹1,73,94,538 and directed the Municipality to collect market fees through its own officials until alternative lawful arrangements were made.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, para. 3; p. 4, para. 7The Municipality appealed only against the amount of the refund, contending that ₹39,16,493 representing its loss should be deducted.
Source reference: pp. 4–5, paras. 8, 12–13Issues
Whether the Municipality was entitled, under the licence conditions, to deduct ₹39,16,493 from the amount otherwise refundable to the first respondent.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 13–14Whether the refund amount fixed by the Single Judge should be modified accordingly.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 12–15Law Applied
The Court identified no specific statute or precedent as the basis for its decision.
Source reference: no citationIt applied the conditions stipulated in the licence, holding that those conditions entitled the Municipality to deduct ₹39,16,493 towards the loss it had incurred.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 14The judgment does not set out the relevant licence clause or further explain the legal basis for the deduction.
Source reference: no citationReasoning
The appeal concerned only the quantum of the refund; the first respondent had not challenged the Single Judge’s order upholding cancellation of the licence.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 12The Municipality relied on its calculation memo and claimed a loss of ₹39,16,493 following cancellation.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 13Accepting that the licence conditions permitted the deduction, the Court reduced the refund from ₹1,73,94,538 by ₹39,16,493, resulting in ₹1,34,78,045.
Source reference: p. 6, paras. 14–15Holding
The Court allowed the writ appeal to the extent of modifying the refund ordered by the Single Judge: the Municipality was directed to refund ₹1,34,78,045, instead of ₹1,73,94,538.
The appeal was allowed to that extent, with no order as to costs; the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Source reference: p. 7, para. 16Original Court PDF
The CommissionervsM. Chandra Sekar
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
