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

2025 Supreme(Mad) 5604

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.S.RAMESH, R.SAKTHIVEL, JJ.
Tmt. R.Santhi W/o.Thiru Sundaraj - Petitioner
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu Represented by Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, - Respondent
WP NOS.20574 AND 19731 OF 2021 AND 18506 OF 2022 AND WMP NOS.21812, 21813 & 21814 OF 2021 IN WP NO.20574 OF 2021 AND WMP NOS.21002 & 21003 OF 2021 IN WP NO.19731 OF 2021 AND WMP NOS.17856 & 17858 OF 2022 IN WP NO.18506 OF 2022 WP NO.20574 OF 2021
Decided On : 02-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.P.Richardson Wilson for M/s.P.Wilson Associates
For the Respondent:Mr.G.Ameedius Government Advocate, Mr.K.Magesh, Mr.M.Velmurugan

Ownership of land designated for community purposes cannot be converted to residential plots without proper authorization; purchasers cannot be deemed encroachers if title is legally acquired.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Panchayat Building Rules, 1970 - Layout ownership and community purpose land - Conversion of community purpose land into residential plots considered invalid and unsustainable in law - Petitioners have obtained legal title through purchase, hence cannot be termed encroachers. (Paras 19, 20, 21)

(B) Restoration Orders - Orders quashing the notice of the second respondent for the land encroachment upheld, with specific directives about removal of bloating placards.

Result: Writ petitions allowed in part.

Table of Content
1. land initially designated for community use must retain that designation. (Para 1 , 2 , 6)
2. arguments presented concerning the invalidation of layout approvals. (Para 4 , 5 , 7)
3. court's observations on the authority of municipal bodies regarding land use. (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 15)
4. legal title in property transactions can safeguard purchasers from claims of encroachment. (Para 14 , 18)
5. judicial outcomes addressing the results of writ petitions. (Para 20 , 21)

ORDER :

R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

An extent of 12 Acre 14 Cents comprised in Survey Nos.785/1, 797/2, 798/1 and 798/2 of Kalapatti Village was developed into a layout with 138 residential plots vide Layout Approval in LP/R(CPN) No.228 of 1985 approved by Senior Deputy Director, Town Planning. In the layout plan, an extent of 2671 sq. mtr. was reserved for community purpose, 1942.5 sq. mtr. was reserved for park, 220 sq. mtr. was reserved for overhead tank and borewell, and 544 sq. mtr. was earmarked for commercial purposes.

2. The case of the writ petitioners in all the instant writ petitions is that an extent of 33 cents 324 sq. ft. in Survey No.797/2, Kalapatti Village was originally owned by V.Ayyasamy and V.Natarajan. Another extent of 33 cents 311 sq.ft., comprised in Survey No.796/1 of Kalapatti Village was originally owned by Vellappakonar.

2.1. V.Ayyasamy and V.Natarajan executed a General Power of Attorney Deed vide Document No.164 of 1985 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Gandhipuram, appointing R.Govindaraj and R.Palanisamy as their Power Agents. Likewise, Vellappakonar executed a registered Power of Attorney Deed dated May 22, 1989 registered as Document No.167 of 1989 on the file of the Sub Registrar Office, Gandhipuram, appointing one R.Radhakrishnan as his Power Agent.

2.2. Vellappakonar through his Power Agent - Mr.R.Radhakrishnan sold the entire extent comprised in Survey No.796/1 on December 04, 1989 in favour of M.Selvaraj, S.Gopalakrishnan and B.Venugopal. Likewise, V.Ayyasamy and V.Natarajan through their the Power Agents - Govindaraj and Palanisamy sold the entire extent of 33 cents 324 sq.ft. comprised in Survey No.797/2 on December 4, 1989 in favour of M.Selvaraj, S.Gopalakrishnan and B.Venugopal. Both the Sale Deeds were initially registered in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Vadakkancherry, Kerala. Later after paying the remaining stamp duties and registration fees, it was registered in the Sub Registrar Office, Gandhipuram. Hence, the aforesaid persons viz., M.Selvaraj, S.Gopalakrishnan and B.Venugopal are absolute owners of the properties comprised in S.Nos.797/2 and 796/1 of Kalapatti Village, Coimbatore Taluk.

2.3. Thereafter, one of the purchasers, namely, M.Selvaraj passed away leaving behind his wife - Saraswathi, father - Marappan and mother - Chinnammal as his legal heirs and they jointly executed a Power of Attorney dated September 27, 2004, appointing S.Gopalakrishnan and B.Venugopal, the co-owners, as their Power Agents to sell their shares in Survey No.797/2 and 796/1.

2.4. The aforesaid persons obtained a layout plan from the erstwhile Kalapatti Town Panchayat on March 23, 1993 for the entire extent of 267 sq. mtr. and thereby divided the properties into 9 plots /n sites and sold them to various individuals.

2.5. The writ petitioners are purchasers of six of the nine sites. Santhi, the writ petitioner in W.P. No.20574 of 2021, directly purchased Site Nos.7, 8 and 9 vide three Sale Deeds even dated January 20, 2006. Gunasekaran and his wife - Renuka, the writ petitioners in W.P. No.19731 of 2021, vide Sale Deed dated April 11, 2008, purchased Site No.3 from one Arumugam, Power Agent of Kannappan Arumugam; Kannappan Arumugam had purchased it through his Power Agent from S.Gopalakrishnan and B.Venugopal vide Sale Deed dated February 14, 2005. Uma Maheshwari, the writ petitioner in W.P. No.18506 of 2022, jointly with her husband - Srinivasan, purchased Site Nos.5 and 6 vide Sale Deeds even dated November 12, 2004 and in turn

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