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

2022 Supreme(Mad) 1168

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.M. VELUMANI, J.
Ascendas IT Park (Chennai) Limited, Chennai, Rep. By its Authorised signatory A. Senthil Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corporation Limited (TIDCO), Rep. By its Chairman & Managing Director, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.P.No. 13949 of 2021 & W.M.P.No. 14819 of 2021
Decided On : 15-06-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:P.S. Raman (Senior Counsel), A.R. Karunakaran, Advocate. For the Respondents:For the Respondents: R1, G. Masilamani (Senior Counsel), Assisted by Jose John for M/s. King & Partridge, R2, A.S. Manisha for M/s. P. Veena Suresh, R3, A.R.L. Sundaresan (Senior Counsel), Jayesh B. Dolia for M/s. Aiyar & Dolia, R4 & R5, U. Baranidharan, (Additional Government Pleader).

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Writ Petition - Claim for enforcement of contractual obligations under Associate Sector Agreement (ASA) dated 17.06.2003 to lay a connecting road - The petitioner alleged that the 1st respondent agreed to lay a road linking Taramani and Velachery Roads, benefiting the public and avoiding congestion. However, the Court found that clause 2.2 was vague and inchoate, lacking specifics on alignment, width, or cost responsibility. Due to significant delay and lack of clear contractual commitment, the court dismissed the petition. (Paras 1, 17(a), 17(b), 17(c), 18).

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1, 2 and 4 to earmark and lay the proposed road linking Taramani Road and Velacherry Road in the lands bearing Survey Nos.T.S.Nos.1/5 and 1/9 of Thiruvanmiyur Village, formerly Mylapore – Triplicane Taluk now Velacherry Taluk and in S.Nos.300/2B, 300/2C and 301/3 of Kottivakkam Village, formerly Tambaram Taluk now Sholinganallur Taluk, Chennai, Tamil Nadu admeasuring 26.64 acres, as per clause 2.2 of the said Associate Sector Agreement dated 17th June 2003 between the 1st respondent and the petitioner.)

The petitioner has come out with the present Writ Petition seeking for a direction to the respondents 1, 2 and 4 to earmark and lay the proposed road linking Taramani Road and Velacherry Road admeasuring 26.64 acres, adjoining to the land leased out to them, as per clause 2.2 of the said Associate Sector Agreement dated 17th June 2003 between the 1st respondent and the petitioner.

Facts of the case:

2. The petitioner is a joint venture company between the 1st respondent and Ascendas Property Fund Pte Limited, a group company of CapitaLand, Singapore. CapitaLand, amongst other businesses in India, inter alia, is engaged in the business of developing Information Technology Parks (IT Park) and “built to suit” solutions. Ascendas India Private Limited, in pursuant to an initiative by the Government of Tamil Nadu to create IT parks/hubs in Chennai, entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 04.07.2002 with the 1st respondent. Pursuant to the said Memorandum Of Understanding, an Associate Sector Agreement (ASA) dated 17.06.2003 was entered into by the said company with the 1st respondent. Subsequently, the petitioner was incorporated jointly by the said company with the 1st respondent on 03.11.2003 with a view to develop the land to an extent of 15 acres located at Thiruvanmiyur and Kanagam Villages in Velacherry Taluk. The said land measuring 15 acres at CSIR Road at Taramani, Chennai was allotted to the petitioner by the Government of Tamil Nadu on various dates in terms of Associate Sector Agreement (ASA) dated 17.06.2003. The petitioner, subsequently developed and constructed buildings in three phases known as -Pinnacle-, -Crest- and -Zenith- [hereinafter referred to as -IT parks in the said land-].

2(a). On 11.04.2007, the Associate Sector Agreement (ASA) dated 17.06.2003 was amended by deleting certain clauses, but clause 2.2 of Associate Sector Agreement (ASA) was retained, which reads as follows: 2.2. The Company will use the current access of Taramani road for the Project and First party agrees to lay a connecting road by start of the third phase to both the Velacherry and Taramani roads”

2(b). The 1st respondent agreed to lay a connecting road at the time of petitioner starting the development of third phase. The proposed road was to be formed over an adjoining plot of the land and was to a butt the land allotted to the petitioner (known as ITPC). The 1st respondent agreed to lay the said road as and when the petitioner completes the first two phases as traffic would be increased to a great extent and a new connecting road would enable the traffic to avoid already congested Rajiv Gandhi Salai (OMR). The laying of new connecting road was discussed in the meeting and 1st respondent agreed to consider the laying of said road in all the Board Meetings. Originally, the connecting road was agreed to be in 9 meters in width and subsequently it was proposed to lay 18 meters width road. The 1st respondent raised the issue of bearing of cost of 9 meters road, as according to 1st respondent, only the Corporation of Chennai must bear the cost of laying the road. In the meeting held on 16.02.2005, when the petitioner pointed out that the 1st respondent agreed to pay the entire cost for developing the road of 9 meters width, the then

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 Back to top