Madras High Court
Triyambhava House Owners Association vs The Commissioner on 16 August, 2022
Author: T.Raja
Bench: T.Raja
W.P.No.13500 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 16.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P.No.13500 of 2022 and W.M.P.
Nos.12680 and 12682 of 2022
Triyambhava House Owners Association,
rep. by its Secretary,
Kalapatti Main Road (Sitra),
Coimbatore-641 014. ... Petitioner
vs
1.The Commissioner,
Corporation of Coimbatore,
Coimbatore – 641 001.
2.The Deputy Commissioner,
East Zone,
Corporation of Coimbatore,
Coimbatore.
3.S.R.Vishnu Raghavan ...
Respondents
(Third respondent is impleaded vide order
of Court dated 16.08.2022 in W.M.P.
No.16420 in W.P. No.13500 of 2022)
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the
first respondent notice 25.12.2021 and quash the same as illegal and
without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to
restore the Boom Barrier removed at the entrance of the petitioner's
Association located in Survey No.429/1C, Kalapatti Village within the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
W.P.No.13500 of 2022
premises Sri Renga Triyambhava Premises and to restore of the rear
side temporary wall erected on the western side leading to the
carpark in Survey No.425/6 of the Kalapatti Village.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Ravishankar
For Respondents : Mr.K.Magesh,
Standing Counsel for
Coimbatore Corporation
Mr.P.Raja for R3
ORDER
[Order of this Court was delivered by T.RAJA, J.] This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, challenging the notice dated 24/25.12.2021 issued by the Commissioner, Corporation of Coimbatore, the first respondent herein and seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to restore the Boom Barrier, removed at the entrance of their Association, located in Survey No.429/1C, Kalapatti Village within the premises, namely, Sri Renga Triyambhava Premises and to restore the rear side temporary wall, erected on the western side, leading to the car park in Survey No.425/6, Kalapatti Village.
2.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner Association is a registered Association, formed with an object of taking care of common interest of the members of their https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/8 W.P.No.13500 of 2022 Association in the gated community, namely, Sri Renga's Thriyambhava. Earlier the petitioner Association filed a writ petition in W.P. No.554 of 2016 seeking a direction to the respondents therein to restore the compound wall, demolished by the second respondent, situated in North of the Car parking in Survey No.425/6 as shown in the plan annexed to the Gift Deed dated 22.04.2006, registered as Document No.1507/2006 on the file of the SRO, Gandhipuram and this Court, by order dated 07.01.2016, restrained the respondents from in any manner using the land in question as a road, until further orders and granted an order of status quo with regard to the electricity junction box and the said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 26.02.2021 observing therein that the first respondent to call upon the petitioner for a personal hearing by issuing him notice to explain as to why the land on which the compound wall stood originally should not be retrieved back in the light of Gift Deed Document Nos.2364 of 2005 and 1507 of 2006 dated 24.02.2006 and 24.04.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed another writ petition in W.P. No.31902 of 2019 and this Court by order dated 30.11.2021, directed the parties to resort to civil remedy as there are complex and disputed questions raised between the parties therein.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/8 W.P.No.13500 of 2022
3.In this regard, learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to Section 250(1) of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act 1981, submitted that if the owner of any land utilises, sells, leases or otherwise disposes of such land or any portion or portions of the same as sites for the construction of buildings, he or she shall, save in such cases as the site or sites may abut on an existing public or private street, layout and make a street or streets giving access to the site or sites and connecting with an existing public or private street. In this background, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when this Court has made the above observation, without complying with the directions issued by this Court, issuing Notice dated 24/ 25.12.2021 directing the petitioner to remove Boom Barrier and rear side temporary compound wall within 24 hours is liable to be quashed, since the said boom barrier was installed in 2003 for the safety of the members of the petitioner association to prevent the entry of anti social elements as well as strangers.
4.The counter affidavit dated 18.06.2022 filed by the Commissioner, City Municipal Corporation, Coimbatore makes it clear that the petitioner association has never obtained any gated community approval from the competent authority and the petitioner association cannot claim as a gated community of their own. When https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/8 W.P.No.13500 of 2022 there are 4 different layout approvals granted by the then Kalapatti Town Panchayat, comprised in various survey numbers at Kalapatti Village, the members of the petitioner association joined together and constructed compound wall including the public road, earmarked for public purpose and the same was gifted to the then Kalapatti Town Panchayat.
5.It is seen from records that the land covered in Survey No.429/1C has been gifted to the Corporation of Coimbatore by the petitioner association under registered Gift Deeds dated 01.04.2005, 07.04.2005 and 24.02.2006 vide Document Nos.2340 to 2342 of 2005, 2364 of 2005 and 1507 of 2006. When the land covered in Survey No.429/1C has already been admittedly gifted by the petitioner to the Coimbatore Corporation, the petitioner association without any justification whatsoever cannot step into the said property, as the same did not belong to them. In this regard, it is relevant to extract Section 250(1) of the Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation Act 1981, as under:
'250 - Owners obligation to make a street when disposing of lands as building sites – (1) If the owner of any land utilises, sells, leases or otherwise disposes of such land or any portion or portions of the same as sites for the construction of buildings he shall, save in such cases as the site or sites may abut on an existing public or private https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/8 W.P.No.13500 of 2022 street, layout and make a street or streets giving access to the site or sites and connecting with an existing public or private street.'
6.A perusal of the above provision would show that if the owner of the land utilises, sells, leases or otherwise disposes of such land or any portion or portions of the same as sites for the construction of buildings, he or she shall, save in such cases as the site or sites may abut on an existing public or private street, layout and make a street or streets giving access to the site or sites and connecting with an existing public or private street. In the present case, when the petitioner association had already gifted the said property, they are not entitled to put up any boom barrier in Survey No.429/1C and the same is not only a public nuisance, but also amounts to encroachment into the Corporation land. Therefore, the above provision is not applicable to the petitioner, since the above Survey Number is covered in the gifted property.
7.Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the impugned notice has been issued by the first respondent directing the petitioner association to remove the boom barrier within 24 hours, without giving any reasonable time.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/8 W.P.No.13500 of 2022
8.It is contended by the learned counsel for the third respondent/impleaded party that the petitioner association had also put up one arch, without obtaining prior permission.
9.Needless to mention that if any arch has been put up by the petitioner Association in the gifted property, liberty is given to the official respondents to take action in the manner known to law.
10.With the above observation, this writ petition stands dismissed. Consequently, connected W.M.Ps stand closed. No costs.
[T.R.,J.] [K.B.,J.]
16.08.2022
2/2
vga
Index: Yes/No
To
1.The Commissioner,
Corporation of Coimbatore,
Coimbatore – 641 001.
2.The Deputy Commissioner,
East Zone,
Corporation of Coimbatore,
Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7/8
W.P.No.13500 of 2022
T.RAJA,J.
and
K.KUMARESH BABU,J.
vga
W.P.No.13500 of 2022 and W.M.P.
Nos.12680 and 12682 of 2022
16.08.2022
2/2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8/8