Disposed

A.Kishore v. The Secretary to Government

Madras HC24 Apr 2023WP/175/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a writ petition seeking order to demolish unsafe apartment complexes. The court noted that during pendency, the Corporation initiated demolition proceedings and issued a notice under the Municipal Corporation Act, satisfying the grievance. The court noted the Apartment Ownership Act 2022 provisions and disposed of the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; grievance satisfied by demolition notice issued by the Corporation; no costs.

A.Kishore Vs The Secretary to Government — Property and Title | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 24.04.2023

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶7

1.A.Kishore 2.P.G.Raghuraman 3.Mrs.N.Vijayalakshmi

¶8

4.R.Vasanthakumari

¶9

5.R.Jude Vivin Richard

¶10

6.A.Thomas

¶11

7.Mrs.S.Lakshmi

¶12

8.Mrs.S.Gayathri

¶13

... Petitioners

¶14

-Vs-

¶15

The Secretary to Government Municipal and Water Supply Department Secretariat Fort Saint George Chennai.

¶16

The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building Chennai- 600 003.

¶17

The Rohini Gardens Welfare Association Rep by its Secretary Rohini Gardens Raja Annamalaipuram Chennai- 600 028.

¶18

Page 1 of 6

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶21

4.C.M.Thulasidas

¶22

5.A.Panneerselvam 6.D.Krishnamurthi

¶23

7.S.Jeyalakshmi

¶24

8.P.V.Raja Bhoopathy Pandian 9.A.Kothandaraman

¶25

10.Srinivasa Rao Edara 11.Mrs.M.S.Apithakuchambal .. Respondents

¶26

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 2nd respondent Greater Chennai Corporation to order demolition of the apartment complexes at Rohini Gardens, Raja Annamalaipuram on the ground that the same is unsafe for residents as well as the general Public and to facilitate the redevelopment.

¶27

For Petitioners Mr.Kolandaivelu

¶28

For Respondents Mr.A.M.Ayyathurai Government Advocate for R1 Mr.Kandan Doraisamy for R3

¶29

Mr.M.T.Arunan for R4, R5, R6, R7, R8 and R10

¶30

Page 2 of 6

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

This writ petition was filed by the owner of a Flat in the apartment complex named

¶35

as Rohini Gardens at Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai, seeking for a direction to the second respondent to order for the demolition of the apartment complexe on the ground that it has become dilapidated unsafe for human habitation.

¶36

2.During the pendency of this writ petition, the second respondent viz., the Commissioner of Chennai Corporation has initiated proceedings for demolition of the building and notice has been issued u/s 258 of the Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919. In view of the same, the grievance expressed by the petitioner has been satisfied by the second respondent.

¶37

3.Mr.Kandan Duraisamy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the third respondent,

¶38

who is the Secretary of the Rohini Gardens Welfare Association, pointed out to the amendment that was brought into the Tamil Nadu Apartment Ownership Act, 2022, Section 13 provides as follows:

¶39

13 .Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, re-development of a project may be carried out on such terms and conditions, as may be prescribed,-

¶40

(a) with the consent of not less than two-thirds of the apartment owners of the project; or

¶41

(b) if the appropriate authority has certified that the building is in ruinous condition, or in a such a state that it may endanger the lives of the occupants or any other person.

¶42

Page 3 of 6

¶43

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶45

4.It is left open to the Association to act in terms of the above provision dehors the action that is proposed to be taken by the Chennai Corporation.

¶46

5.This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

¶47

24.04.2023

¶48

KP Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking Order:Yes/No Neutral Citation :Yes/No

¶49

Page 4 of 6

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶51

W.P.No.175 of 2022

¶52

¶53

The Secretary to Government Municipal and Water Supply Department Secretariat Fort Saint George Chennai.

¶54

The Commissioner Greater Chennai Corporation Ripon Building Chennai- 600 003.

¶55

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

¶56

Page 5 of 6

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.175 of 2022

W.P.No.175 of 2022

24.04.2023

Page 6 of 6

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

A.Kishore v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Kishore v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Greenwood Owners Association Vs Rajesh Lakhani and another

R.Natarajan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

K.Hassan Ali Vs Rafiullah and another

K. Thillaikarasi Vs TamilNadu Small Industries Development

S.Geetha Vs TamilNadu Small Industries Development

U.Bothal Raj Vs Chennai Metropolitan Development authority