Petitioner challenged alleged encroachment on property claimed to be gifted Open Space Reservation land. Court held disputed facts required civil trial. Granted temporary status quo for one month pending civil suit. Disposed of writ petition.
Direction to respondent to maintain status quo for one month; writ petition disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.P.No.31192 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.27065 of 2016
Chennai Vazh Sattankulam Vattara Nadar Uravinmurai Sangam, Regd.No.876/1979, Rep by its President, A.Krishanan, No.37/5, Arya Gowder Road, West Mambalam, Chennai – 600 033. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Buildings, Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Member Secretary, CMDA, Chennai – 8. (R2 Suo-moto impleaded as per order dated 13.08.2018). ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent, his men, agents subordinates, servants or officials from in any manner interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of the Private property of the Petitioner's Sangam comprised in Revenue Survey No.598/1 and 598/2, Velacherry Village, Saidapet Taluk, measuring an extent of about 13,000 Sq.ft, bounded on the North by Plot No.37 and 40, South by 40 feet Road, east by 24 feet Road and West by 24 Feet Road bearing Patta No.6762.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Suresh
For Respondents: Mr.Ganesan, Standing Counsel for R1 Mr.Tamilmani, Standing Counsel for R2
O R D E R
Earlier the petitioner had filed W.P.No.29801 of 2005 against the Commisioner, Alandur Municipality represented by its Commissioner which has been merged that the respondent Greater Chennai Corporation. In the said writ petition, the petitioner had secured an interim order dated 16.09.2005 which was made absolute on 26.10.2006. Thereafter, the writ petition was disposed by the order dated 22.01.2003 with the following observations:
5.Since the petitioiner claims to be in possession of the property in question for several years, the Writ Petition is disposed of by observing that it is open to the Corporation of Chennai, to take action against the petitioner if they have encroached into the property of the Corporation of Chennai, after giving notice to the petitioner.
2.The petitioner has now filed the present writ petition stating that the 1st respondent is encroaching on the property of the petitioner which was settled in favour of the petitioner's trust under a settlement deed dated 25.03.1982 and that the petitioner has been in possession of the said property and patta has been issued by the Revenue Authorities in favour of the petitioner as early as 13.01.1994. The 1st respondent has filed a counter. In para 4 it has been stated as follows:
4.I respectfully submit that the said vacant land measuring 5 ground and 100 sq.ft (i.e 13000 sq.ft) in Survey No.598/1 and 598/2 in Velacherry Village was originally allotted for communcal and recreation purpose in the approved layout No.6/76 by former MMDA (presently CMDA) in the year 1976. Presently those lands allotted for communcal and rereation purposes are mentioned as OSR (Open space reservation) used for public parks and playfield area by local bodies and Municipal Corporations. Those OSR lands could not be sold to any third persons by the layout promoter. This was sold by a gift deed to the petitioner by the legal heirs of the layout promoter as per the document No.1227/1982 at the Sub Regiter Office of Saidapet. Based on the document the petitionern obtains Patta. Also letter has been sent by Greater Chennai
Corporation to Thasildar, Velacherry to cancel the Patta issued to the petitioner.
3.It is further submitted that the land in question is a OSR land allotted in the layout can not be allowed for any civil structures and only parks playfied with basic amenities could be allowed in OSR lands as per development rules of Chennai Second Master Plan by CMDA. Therefore, the petitioner has no rights to run a primary school or kalyana mandapam on the OSR land.
4.It is the case of the respondent that the petitioner is trying to establish a right over the land allegedly gifted in favour of the 1st respondent for the purpose of OSR. Since there are several disputed questions of fact as to whether the petitioner Sangam is entitled to exercise any right over the land which is being allegedly encroached upon by the 1st respondent, it is not possible for this Court to act as a Civil Court to decide the disputed questions of fact. Therefore, the present Writ Petition is not maintainable. It is for the petitioner to file a Civil Suit before a Court of competent jurisdiction to establish the right and to injunct the respondent for alleged encroachment of the petitioner's alleged property.
5.Since the writ petition has been pending before this Court for the last four years, I am inclined to grant a limited relief to the petitioner for a period of one month by directing the respondent to maintain the status quo. Within such period, it is open to the petitioner to approach a Civil Court to work out the remedy in a manner known to law.
6.Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
jas
To
1.The Commissioner,
Greater Chennai Corporation, Ripon Buildings, Chennai – 600 003.
2.The Member Secretary, CMDA, Chennai – 8. +1cc to Mr.M.Ganesan, Advocate Sr.5244 +1cc to Mr.A.R.Suresh, Advocate Sr.5020
W.P.No.31192 of 2016 and W.M.P.No.27065 of 2016
ak II[co] srg 02/03/2021
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ court can decide disputed questions of fact regarding alleged encroachment on OSR land gifted via settlement deed.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable to restrain the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's possession of the plot.
What relief, if any, can be granted to maintain the status quo while the parties determine rights in a Civil Court.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chennai Vazh Sattankulam Vattara Nadar Uravinmurai Sangam
Commissioner, Greater Chennai Corporation
Member Secretary, CMDA
C. Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
