Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V. PARTHIBAN, J.
Regal Palm Garden Apartment Owners Association – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Cee Dee Yes Housing and Infrastructure Private Limited – Respondent
O.A. Nos. 847, 848 of 2019, C.S. No. 535 of 2019
Decided On : 06-09-2021
Code of Civil Procedure,1908 -Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 - Order XIV Rule 8 - Acquisition land - Interim Injunction - Controversy - Applicant is the apartment owners-association - Fourth respondent/fourth defendant is owner of a larger extent of property comprised in Village ad-measuring acres - First respondent/first defendant proposed to develop property and approached fourth respondent for said purpose – Third respondent/third defendant was Managing Director of first respondent/Company- According to applicant third respondent was personally involved in all stages of transactions and therefore he was arrayed as a party in suit - First respondent/developer after having negotiated with fourth respondent and thereafter after obtaining necessary permission and approval from State authorities had put up housing complex - Building permission was granted for construction of with residential area of and commercial area of According to applicant it was a composite single planning permission granted by CMDA/seventh respondent with reference to Village – Held balance of convenience pleaded on behalf of applicant/plaintiff is rather a hackneyed and clichéd plea without any strong and clinching material in support for grant of interim injunction- Mere pleading balance of convenience perfunctorily unsupported by materials cannot perforce be a valid pleading for this Court to entertain such injunction applications - This Court finds that learned counsel for applicant has though taken pains to explain every detail of sale transactions and also plethora of averments as contained in plaint starting from when project was conceived and developed yet ultimately right of applicant is said to emanate only from date when MoU was entered into on - All other events preceded to said starting point of cause of action may have a limited relevance for understanding of background which led to parties and agreeing to formulate for consideration of main controversy - Nevertheless this Court is only to see if any indefeasible right could be read into MoU at all answer is in negative – Petition dismissed
ORDER :
Prayer: Judge’s Summons under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules of this Court, read with Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and Original Application (O.A.) No. 847 of 2019 in C.S. No. 535 of 2019 is filed praying to grant ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents 1 to 4, their heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns or any person claiming through them from in any manner sub-dividing the schedule mentioned property by metes and bounds and maintain the same as per the composite plan granted by the seventh respondent, dated 02.05.2002 in Planning Permit No. 332, pending disposal of the suit.
Judge’s Summons under Order XIV Rule 8 of the Original Side Rules of this Court, read with Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and Original Application (O.A.) No. 848 of 2019 in C.S. No. 535 of 2019 is filed praying to grant ad-interim injunction restraining the respondents, men, servants, agents or any person claiming through them from in any manner alienating or encumbering the suit schedule property, pending disposal of the suit.
Schedule
All that piece and parcel of land situated in No. 383, Velachery-Tambaram Road, Velachery, Chennai-42 on the Southern part in S. No. 329 (Part) of 137, Velachery Village, Mambalam Guindy Talluk, Chennai, measuring an extent of 10,156 Sq. Ft. or thereabouts, bounded on the:
North by: S. No. 329 part property owned by Cee Dee Yes Standard Towers Pvt. Ltd.
South by: S. Nos. 331 and 330.
East by: S. Nos. 328/1 and 328/2.
West by : Velachery Tambaram Main Road.
1. The applicant herein is the plaintiff in the suit.
2. The suit has been filed for the following prayers:
(b) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants 1 to 4 and 8, their heirs, successors-in-interest, assigns or any person claiming through them from in any manner sub-dividing the schedule mentioned property by metes and bounds and maintain the same as per the composite plan granted by the seventh defendant dated 02.05.2002 in Planning Permit No. 332, (prayers amended as per order dated 21.12.2020 in A. No. 2810 of 2020 in C.S. No. 535 of 2019).
(c) for costs of the suit.
3. The applicant is the apartment owners-association. The fourth respondent/fourth defendant is the owner of a larger extent of property comprised in S. Nos. 328/2, 256/2, 327/1, 325/1, 325/2, 325/3 and 329 of Velachery Village, ad-measuring 6.86 acres. The first respondent/first defendant proposed to develop the property and approached the fourth respondent for the said purpose. The third respondent/third defendant was the Managing Director of the first respondent/Company. According to the applicant herein, the third respondent was personally involved in all the stages of transactions, and therefore, he was arrayed as a party in the suit.
4. The first respondent/developer, after having negotiated with the fourth respondent, and thereafter, after obtaining necessary permission and approval from the State authorities, had put up housing complex. Building permission was granted for construction of 7,42,265 Sq. Ft. with residential area of 6,22,673 Sq. Ft. and commercial area of 1,95,592 Sq. Ft. According to the applicant, it was a composite single planning permission granted by the CMDA/seventh respondent herein with reference to S. No. 329 of Velacherry Village.
5. In the course of development of the housing complex, the first and third respondents entered into a sale-cum-construction agreement for the undivided share in the land and built up area with all the prospective purchasers and the suit schedule property was an integral part in all the agreements. On the basis of the agreement, the purchaser, who was
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
