Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent and the first respondent through the impugned proceedings dated 27.02.2020 confirmed the decision taken by the second respondent. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.

5. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the property that was agreed to be sold in favour of the petitioner was punja land measuring an extent of 1.06 acres along with a godown measuring an extent of 9641 sq.ft. and the age of the building was nearly 25 years. In view of the same, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that the same will not come within the definition of 'layout' as provided under Rule 8 of the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tamil Nadu Regularisation of Unapproved Layouts and Plots Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “Rules” for brevity).

6. The learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the property in question was not a plot and it was only retained as punja land by the vendor and therefore, the same will not come within the definition of 'plot' or 'unapproved plot' as provided under Rule 13 of the Rules. It was contended that refusal to register the document by citing Section 22A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908 and G.O.Ms.No.78, Housing and Urban Development (UD4(3)) Department, dated 04.05.2017, is totally unsustainable. In view of the same, the learned senior counsel sought for interference with the order passed by the first and second respondents and for consequential direction to the second respondent to register the sale deed and to release the same.

8. The learned Additional Government Pleader further submitted that the said Udhayanan had dealt with all the other plots and had sold the same in the year 2012. With respect to the remaining portion, the same was attempted to be sold to the petitioner. On the inspection made by the second respondent, it was ascertained that the subject property that was attempted to be sold to the petitioner also formed part of the unapproved plot and therefore, a decision was taken to the effect that the property cannot be sold without approval and refusal to register such document can be made under Section 22A(2) of the Registration Act, 1908.

12. However, the learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the subject property was part of the layout and while executing the gift deed in favour of the local authorities on 31.05.2016 by the vendor of the petitioner, the subject property also formed part of the layout and for this purpose, a portion of the property was gifted to the local body for the purpose of laying the road for the unapproved plots.