Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

(A) Sanction of Lay-out plan, development permission for land bearing consolidated Final Plot No.2+6+(12+13)/1, sale & handing over possession of Tenements to the Applicants and common plot, road, main gate to the Applicant No.1 society; during year 2006-2011: 

   Date    Description                                     Pg No.
10/2/2006

1. FP No. 2,6,(12+13)/1 reconstituted by altering F-forms C/LPA/1768/2019 IA ORDER original plots bearing Survey 125-130 No.497/1,498/P,500/1+2+3, 508/P of Thaltej in making of TP Scheme No.37/A(Thaltej) as per Sec 2(xii), 2(xxii) of the Act. 

   C/LPA/1768/2019                                   IA ORDER




05/7/2011
       7. Draft TP Scheme sanctioned by the Opponent                  51-52
           No.1, FP No. 2, 6, (12+13)/1 marked as de-

           reserved plots.
26/12/201
       8. On registration of Appellant-1 society under                  61
           Gujarat     Co.Op.    Society     Act,1961   for

owners/tenants of tenements built in land including land bearing FP No. 2; ownership rights of common plots-1, 2 sanctioned in Lay- out plan had vested on the Applicant-1 as per provision of regulation 2.21 of GDCR 2006. As sanctioned lay-out plan is deemed registered document as per provision of Section 106(1) of the Act and Section 90(1)(b), 90(2) of the Registration Act, 1908; titles of common plot land are transferred to the Applicant-1 society, hence the Applicant-1 is co-owner/co-occupier of land bearing the said Final Plot.

In WRIT PETITION (PIL) No.347 of 2013, observing provision of GDCR for common plot, this Hon'ble court has held that...

"The common plot shall not be sold to any other person and it shall not be put to any other use, except for the common use of the residents/occupants.
(g) There is irregularity in TPO's decision, as sub-divided part of FP No. 2 admeasuring 2130 Sq.Mtrs. is fraudulently denoted as FP No.32/2 in preliminary scheme plan and sub-divided part of reserve land 264 bearing FP No. 32 admeasuring 2132 along with additional reserve land of 41 Sq.Mtrs. is fraudulently denoted as FP No. 2/2/2 in preliminary scheme plan,without any order/approval of competent authority;

It is respectfully submitted that the aforesaid observations made in the order sought to be reviewed, had arisen in wake of the contention raised by the applicants in the course of hearing of the captained appeal to the effect that on account of the decision taken by the Town Planning Officer to divide F.P.No.2 into three parts and earmarking one of the parts, as reserved for 'sale for residence' and subsequent sanction of the preliminary scheme, applicants right to have access from the T.P.Road as well as part of the common plot of the applicants is getting affected. But the said contention raised by the applicants was found to be false by the Hon'ble Court in view of the fact that earlier the development permission dated 27.06.2011 granted in respect of the applicants' land, no such road and common plot, as projected by the applicants was made available to the applicants in the lay-out sanctioned pursuant to the said development permission. Therefore subsequent to the said development permissions, on account of decision taken by the T.P.O. of dividing /reconstituting F.P.No.2, no question T.P.Road as well as part of the common plot of the applicants getting affected on account of on account of decision taken by the T.P.O., would arise. Therefore question whether the development permission dated 27.06.2011 was obtained by the applicants or opponent no.5 and others would not be significant.