Madras High Court
K.Manjula vs Chennai Metropolitan Development ... on 5 July, 2023
Author: P.D.Audikesavalu
Bench: Sanjay V.Gangapurwala, P.D.Audikesavalu
W.A. No. 1524 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.07.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V.GANGAPURWALA , CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.D.AUDIKESAVALU
W.A. No. 1524 of 2021
and
C.M.P. No. 9668 of 2021
K.Manjula ... Appellant
Vs
1. Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority
Rep. By its Member Secretary
“Thalamuthu-Natarajan Maaligai”
No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road
Egmore, Chennai – 600008.
2. Corporation of Chennai
Planning Department
Zone No.15, Zonal Office
Sholinganallur, Chennai.
3. M/s. Emerald Haven Town Country
Private Limited
Represented by its Director
No. 29, Haddows Road
Nungambakkam
Chennai – 600006. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 1524 of 2021
modify the order dated 9.02.2021 in W.P. No. 3326 of 2020 by
directing the third respondent herein to convey and handover in favour
the second respondent herein, 5.1 meter wide X 10.50 meter length
passage road in plot No.III lying between the Appellant land and 7.2
meter wide public road having boundaries in Plot No.51, and remaining
part of Plot III on north, the Petitioner's land in West and Plot No.100
on south and 7.2 meter Public road on east.
For the Appellant :: Mr. J.Ravikumar
For the Respondents :: Mr. P.Kumaresan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr. P.Veena Suresh (R1)
:: Mr. Sathish Parasaran
Senior Counsel
For M/s. R.Parthasarathy (R3)
:: Mr. A.Arun Babu (R2)
JUDGMENT
(Made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice) We have heard Mr.J.Ravikumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.P.Kumaresan, learned Additional Advocate General for the first respondent, Mr.A.Arun Babu, learned counsel for the second Page 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No. 1524 of 2021 respondent and Mr.Satish Parasaran, learned senior counsel for the third respondent.
2. The appellant is assailing the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The learned Single Judge of this Court in a petition filed by the present appellant has provided right of way to the appellant from the land of the present respondent no.3.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the said strip of land, which is provided as a road should be gifted by the third respondent to the second respondent.
4. In the present appeal, an affidavit is filed by the third respondent. Para no.9 of the affidavit reads thus:
“9. I further state that, failing the above, the third respondent has decided to make an application for planning approval of the said public purpose plot III and, on acceptance of the same, the Respondent is prepared to execute a gift of the said 5.1 meter-wide access from and out of the Public Purpose Plot No.III of the aforesaid layout in favour of the local body. Such gifting of the 5.1 meter wide Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No. 1524 of 2021 road situated on the Southern side of public purpose plot III approved vide the planning permission PPD/LO/No. 82/2019 dated 29.01.2019 comprised in Sy.No.70/5C of Karapakkam Village, Sholinganallaur Taluk, Chennai District, and measuring about 58 square meters, would satisfy the Appellant's alleged grievances as well. As the access available to the Petitioner's property is 5.1 meter wide through the public purpose plot III, the Respondents 1 and 2 may be directed to accept the said 5.1 meter wide access by way of gift. The present proposal is made by the answering respondent herein as a settlement offer without prejudice to its rights and contentions, in order to attempt once again to achieve a quietus to the issue.”
5. The learned advocate for the appellant, the learned Additional Advocate General for respondent no.1, the learned counsel for respondent no.2 and the learned senior counsel for respondent no.3 are agreeable to the proposition as put forth by the third respondent in para no.9 of the affidavit as referred to above.
6. In light of that, all the parties including the third respondent herein, shall perform their part as detailed in para no.9 of the affidavit and reproduced above.
Page 4 of 6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No. 1524 of 2021 With this observation, the writ appeal is disposed of. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.V.G., CJ.) (P.D.A., J.)
05.07.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
sra
To
1. The Member Secretary
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority “Thalamuthu-Natarajan Maaligai” No.1, Gandhi Irwin Road Egmore, Chennai – 600008.
2. Corporation of Chennai Planning Department Zone No.15, Zonal Office Sholinganallur, Chennai.
Page 5 of 6https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A. No. 1524 of 2021 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND P.D.AUDIKESAVALU, J.
(sra) W.A. No. 1524 of 2021 05.07.2023 Page 6 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis