SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(Ker) 318

A.S.VENKATACHALA MOORTHY, G.SASIDHARAN, P.K.BALASUBRAMANYAN
Francis – Appellant
Versus
Chalakudy Municipality – Respondent


Judgment :-

P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.

The petitioners are owners of small extents of land within Chalakudy Municipality. With a view to take up a detailed town planning scheme restrictions were imposed on the user of the said lands. The petitioners applied for licences to construct houses. They received replies to the effect that the lands are freezed for the purpose of a detailed town planning scheme. The petitioners could not therefore put the lands to the use they wanted to.

2. On 1.11.1975 a notification was issued under S.8 of the Town Planning Act. The said notification indicated the properties sought to be included in the scheme. The said scheme was approved by the Government under sub-s.3 of S.12 of the Town Planning Act. Ext. P2 order dated 6.3.1984 was issued in that behalf. It is the case of the petitioners that as per the said Government order sanction had been granted only as regards the scheme for the purpose of an office complex at Chalakudy. On the scheme of the Act the properties were not acquired within three years of the notification dated 6.3.1984. According to the petitioners since the Government order under the scheme was not followed by a notification within thr




























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top