Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
P.Jeyakumar – Appellant
Versus
Mrs.I.Bhavani – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the petitioner company created a layout under new regulations. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments emphasize usage rights and legal standing of pathway agreements. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 3. counterarguments focus on ownership and validity of claims regarding the pathway. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. court's analysis on the rights established in pathway agreements. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. court clarifies legal interpretation of access rights versus ownership. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. cancellation orders deemed unsustainable without better legal claim. (Para 36) |
| 7. court's decision to set aside the impugned orders and allow the writ petitions. (Para 37) |
COMMON ORDER
WP(MD).No.25812 of 2025 has been filed by the layout promoter challenging the order of the Director of Town and Country Planning dated 03.09.2025 wherein the layout approval already granted in favour of the petitioner company on 27.12.2017 has been cancelled.
2.W.P(MD).No.30373 of 2025 has been filed by four plot owners challenging the above said order and the the consequential order of the Assistant Director of Town and Country Planning, Madurai dated 11.09.2025 where
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
