with the clarification that the
petitioner shall be required to keep common plot open for
maintenance of facilities of the residents of the area ... which will be removed wiuthin 48 hours and the common
plot shall be kept open.
Direct Service is permitted.
26.7.02 (JAYANT PATEL
Covered projection, (iv) Change of use, (v) A common plot and a consolidated open plot, (vi) Height of a building (b) The designated authority ... that the designated authority may permit provision of parking facilities at a common place by more than one person. [Provided further that in case where
allotted the western most plot marked as A in the plan, the second brother Muthulingam the B marked plot, Thulukkanam C marked, Arjunan D marked ... plot up to the eastern end of Subbarayan's plot opening at Muthu Mariamman Koil Street as a common lane for all of them
total land was divided into 42 buildable plots, roads and certain open space meant for common use and enjoyment of the said 42 plots ... plots get a right to use in common with the original owner so long as he retains on or more plots -- the open space, because
Covered projection, (iv) Change of use, (v) A common plot and a consolidated open plot, (vi) Height of a building (b) The designated authority ... that the designated authority may permit provision of parking facilities at a common place by more than one person. [Provided further that in case where
open plots for housing, dwelling houses or flats; or if open plots, the dwelling houses or flats are already acquired, to provide its members common
accepted, then it may not be open to the land owner to sell the plot as sanctioned lay out after the lapse of such sanction ... plots in the sanctioned lay out get a vested right for their benefit at large, it may not be open to the land owner
more than 10& of the total land was kept open for recreational space, children part etc. it is submitted that in the absence ... copy of sanctioned layout, it was difficult to locate 10% of common recreational open space. It was further stated in the said affidavit that sufficient
Ashok Uttekar had some dispute with the deceased over some open plot of land and due to this, he was shot dead, it is pertinent ... Therefore, there was no question of accused No. 1 sharing a common intention with accused Nos. 2 and 3 as accused No. 1 was only
open space
and without obtaining any sanction. They
also occupied unauthorizedly the common
areas, public lands, streets and roads
and all possible available open space ... certain open areas
which were unauthorizedly encroached upon have since
been cleared. However, the DDA has now decided to
allot plots for purpose of trade
