Madras High Court
D.Sundarrajan vs Ms.R.Vijaya on 18 August, 2022
Author: T.Raja
Bench: T.Raja
Cont.P.No.1137 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 18.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
Contempt Petition No.1137 of 2019
D.Sundarrajan ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.Ms.R.Vijaya,
The Executive Officer,
Thirunindravur Town Panchayat,
CTH Road,
Thirunindravur-602 024.
2. Dhanalakshmi ... Respondents
(2nd respondent was impleaded as per the order of
this Court dated 27.07.2022 passed in Sub-Appln.
No.374/2021 in Cont.P.No.1137/2019)
Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for their willful
disobedience to comply with the order passed in W.P.No.26642/2017
dated 13.10.2017 by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Ananthapadmanabhan
For Respondents : Mr.K.Harikrishnan for R2
Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal for R1
Ms.S.Vaitheeswari
for Advocate Commissioner
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.1137 of 2019 (Order of the Court was made by T.RAJA.J) The present Contempt Petition has been filed seeking to punish the respondents for their willful disobedience to comply with the order passed in W.P.No.26642/2017 dated 13.10.2017 by this Court.
2. To-day, when the matter was called, Ms.S.Vaitheeswari, learned Advocate Commissioner has filed her report dated 17.08.2022 before this Court concluding as follows:
''CONCLUSION
16. I submit that there is no encroachment of area by 2nd respondent earmarked for road as per layout. Since there is no intersection of road, necessity of splay will not arise, as per the provisions of the Development Control Rules stated above. Even though the MMDA Approved Layout Plan shows there is splay, but the plan is silent about the measurement of the splay. Hence the clarity on the measurement can be given only by Planning Authority, namely, erstwhile MMDA (Madras Metropolitan Development Authority), now CMDA (Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority).''
3. In view of the above, since the Advocate Commissioner https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.1137 of 2019 has visited the spot-in-question personally and submitted her report stating that there is no encroachment of area by the 2nd respondent earmarked for road as per the layout, accepting the report of the Advocate Commissioner, we hereby dismiss the present Contempt Petition as no case is made out.
(T.R.J.,) (K.B.J.,)
18.08.2022
tsi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.1137 of 2019 T.RAJA, J.
AND K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
tsi Contempt Petition No.1137/2019 18.08.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Cont.P.No.1137 of 2019 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis