Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3 Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the typed set of documents and would submit that in the area in question, more than 300 houses of similar nature are there and though the application submitted by the petitioner for issuance of patta, has been kept pending unreasonably for quite long time, admittedly, the petitioner has submitted an application for planning permission to the Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority with regard to the regularisation of the unapproved plots and layouts and vide registration slip bearing CMDA/P/0007988/2017, the said application was acknowledged on 28.10.2017 and pendency of the application, it is not open to the respondent to demolish the superstructure in which the petitioner along with his family are residing and hence, prays for appropriate orders.

4 Per contra, Mr.P.Srinivas, learned Standing counsel appearing for the sole respondent has invited the attention of this Court to the typed set of documents and would submit that the petitioner claims right, title and possession in respect of the land in question through an unreasonable Sale Deed and it would not amount to any right and also further drawn the attention of this Court to page No.30 of the typed set of documents and would submit that though the application for regularisation of unapproved plots is pending on the file of CMDA, the petitioner has proceeded with the construction and continues to indulge in illegality and he is not entitled to any indulgence from this Court and prays for dismissal of this writ petition.

5 The Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the materials placed before it.

6 The petitioner claims title in respect of the land in question through an unregistered Sale Deed and also approached CMDA for regularisation of the unapproved layout and it has also been acknowledged by the said authority on 28.10.2017 and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said application is under process. A perusal of the photograph would disclose that construction has come to the first floor level and pending application for regularisation of the unapproved plots, it is not open to the petitioner to put up the construction without any planning permission or approval. Be that as it may, since the application submitted by the petitioner for registration of unapproved plots and layouts is pending, this Court is of the view that till the consideration and passing of orders on the said application, the existing state of the superstructure being put up by the petitioner without planning permission, as per the photographs available in page No.30 of the typed set of documents, shall be maintained.

7 Accordingly, the respondent as well as the petitioner shall maintain status quo with regard to the superstructure being put up by the petitioner as per the photographs available in page No.30 [Xerox copy of which is annexed along with this order] of the typed set of documents, till the disposal of the application seeking registration for the unapproved plot/layout. It is made clear that the petitioner shall not create any third party rights in respect of the land and superstructure in question till the disposal of the application for regularisation of the unapproved layout by CMDA.