Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

P.Mala Vs the Director of Town and Country — Municipal and Town Planning | Madras HC (2024)

Home
Madras HC
2024
P.Mala Vs the Director of Town and CountryP.Mala v. the Director of Town and Country

Disposed

P.Mala v. the Director of Town and Country

Madras HC22 Oct 2024WP/1557/2024

Case brief

from the order text

What is this about?

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS…

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

A

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.10.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

W.P.No.1557 of 2024 and WMP.Nos.1572 & 1573 of 2024

P.Mala ... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Director of Town and Country Planning, Having Office at Chennai Metropolitan Development Corporation Building, E and C Market Road, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107 2.The Tahsildar, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District 3.M/s.S & P Foundation Pvt.Ltd., Represented by S.V.Sriramalu, No.6, Amarvilla, No.4/211, MGR Street, Palavakkam, Chennai 600 041 4.The Sub Registrar, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram (1st respondent cause title amended as per order dated 25.09.2024 in WMP.No.30906 of 2024 in WP.No.1557 of 2024) ... Respondents

1/11

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

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the layout approval dated 19.08.2021 wrongly depicted survey no.42/1 as located on the southern side contrary to revenue records.

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
P.Mala
respondent
The Director of Town and Country Planning, Chennai
respondent
The Tahsildar, Kundrathur Taluk
respondent
M/s.S & P Foundation Pvt.Ltd.
respondent
The Sub Registrar, Sriperumbudur

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 22 Oct 2024 · October
Registered: 22 Jan 2024
Case no.: WP/1557/2024

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from G.k. Ilanthiraiyan

Srinath Theatres Private Ltd., Vs The Commissioner
21 Oct 2024
M.Rajalakshmi Vs Principal Secretary
21 Oct 2024
R.Radhakrishnan Vs The Commissioner
21 Oct 2024
R Vignesh Vs Prem Estates
22 Oct 2024

Cite this judgement

P.Mala v. the Director of Town and Country, WP/1557/2024 (MAD), decided on 22 October 2024.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Constitution of IndiaArticle 226

View all statutes

Bench / Coram

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Parties & counsel

Disposed

Issue for consideration

Whether the layout approval dated 19.08.2021 wrongly depicted survey no.42/1 as located on the southern side contrary to revenue records.

A compact analysis

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.

PRAYER:

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India p raying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent herein culminating in Na.Ka.No.7060/2021/TCP 5 dated 19.08.2021 on the file of the first respondent herein and quash the same insofar as the same relates to survey no.42/1 of Karasangal Village of Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District is concerned and direct the first respondent herein to modify the impugned approval by taking note of the topography of survey no.42/2 and 42/1 based on the revenue records including patta

and FMB.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Santhanaraman For Respondents For R1,2&4 : Mr.V.Manoharan, Additional Government Pleader For R3 : Mr.K.K.Sivashanmugam

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the layout

approval dated 19.08.2021 granted in Na.Ka.No.7060/2021/TCP 5 on the

file of the first respondent insofar as the property comprised in survey

2/11

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

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

no.42/1 of Karasangal Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District.

According to the petitioner, the property comprised in survey no.42 admeasuring 2.36 acres situated at Karasangal Village is owned by the petitioner's family, in which her grandfather and his brother are entitled to equal share i.e. 1.36 acres. However, her grandfather's brother's family erroneously sold 1.36 acres of land in survey no.42 out of total extent of 2.36 acres in favour of the third respondent by the registered sale deed dated 31.05.2006 vide document No.8673 of 2006. Therefore, one branch of legal heirs i.e. the petitioner and her mother filed suit in OS.No.374 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Sriperumbudur as against the vendor of the third respondent and the third respondent for declaration declaring the sale deed executed in favour of the third respondent as null and void. While pending the suit, there was compromise entered between the parties thereby the sale deed executed in favour of the third respondent was ratified by the petitioner and her family members. In respect of the remaining one acre, it was settled in favour of the petitioner herein by the

3/11

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

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

compromise decree dated 06.12.2014. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued patta after sub division of survey No.42 as 42/1 and 42/2. Survey No.42/1 is situated on the northern side and survey No.42/2 is situated on the southern side. The extent of the property in survey no.42/1 is 1.36 acres and the extent of the property in survey No.42/2 is one acre.

2.1 According to the petitioner, the property comprised in survey No.42/1 is situated on the northern side. Accordingly, necessary changes were made and the same were entered in the revenue records including the FMB sketch of the subject property. While being so, the third respondent had shown the property comprised in survey no.42/1 as if located on the southern side and obtained layout approval along with the adjacent property. As per the lay out, the land comprised in survey No.42/1 has been shown as road and the same was gifted in favour of the President of Karasangal Panchayat, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District by the gift deed dated 04.04.2022 registered vide document No.2854 of 2022. Therefore, the petitioner submitted representation stating that the property comprised in survey No.42/1 is located on the

4/11

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

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

northern side and the property comprised in survey No.42/2 is located on the southern side by enclosing FMB sketch. However, the said representation was not considered and as such, the petitioner was constrained to file writ petition before this Court in WP.No.15029 of 2023 and this Court by an order dated 10.05.2023 directed the second respondent to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner and to dispose of the same within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

2.2 In the meanwhile, the petitioner also sent another representation dated 08.07.2022 to the second respondent to rectify the manipulations done by the third respondent. The second respondent by order dated 08.03.2023 ordered to the effect that survey No.42/2 of Karasangal Village has been wrongly shown as if situated in northern side, which is entered in Taluk account correctly as situated in southern side and the same was modified in village accounts as if the property comprised in survey No.42/1 is situated in the northern side and the revenue records and FMB should be corrected as in the Taluk accounts to

5/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

the effect that the property admeasuring 0.55.0 ares comprised in survey No.42/1 is situated on the northern side and the property admeasuring 0.40.5 ares is situated on the southern side. Accordingly, changes were made. As directed by this Court, the second respondent had surveyed the subject property with police assistance and the third respondent had objected the same in respect of identifying the subject property. However, it was identified that the property comprised in survey No.42/2 is located on the southern side and issued order dated 17.10.2023 to that effect. Subsequently, the third respondent attempted to trespass the petitioner's land. Therefore the petitioner lodged complaint.

2.3 Thereafter on verification of gift deed executed by the third respondent and also the layout approval, the petitioner came to understand that the third respondent obtained planning approval by manipulating the FMB sketch as the land comprised in survey no.42/1 is is located on the southern side and gifted the said land in favour of the local authority. Therefore, the petitioner objected the same. However, the said objection was not considered and as such, the petitioner challenged

6/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

the very layout approval insofar as the land which was gifted in favour of the local body comprised in survey no.42/1 of Karasangal Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District is concerned and sought for direction to rectify the approval by taking note of the topography of survey No.42/2 and 42/1 based on the revenue records and patta.

Heard, the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused all the materials placed before this Court.

Admittedly, there is no dispute in respect of the extent of the

property comprised in survey No.42/1 as 0.55.0 ares and the property comprised in survey no.42/2 as 0.40.5 ares. Whether which property is located on which side is the only dispute. As per the revenue records, the land comprised in survey no.42/1 is situated on the northern side and the property comprised in survey no.42/2 is located on the southern side.

In view of the above, the second respondent is directed to

7/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

survey the land comprised in survey no.42/1 situated at Karasangal Village, Kundrathur Taluk, Kancheepuram District as per the revenue records and submit a report before the first respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. On receipt of the said report, the first respondent is directed to accordingly modify the layout approval dated 19.08.2021 within a period of four weeks thereafter. Till then, the layout approval dated 19.08.2021 cannot be acted upon.

With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

22.10.2024

Neutral citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order lok

8/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

To

1.The Director of Town and Country Planning, Having Office at Chennai Metropolitan Development Corporation Building, E and C Market Road, Koyambedu, Chennai 600 107

2.The Tahsildar,

Kundrathur Taluk,

Kancheepuram District

3.S.V.Sriramalu, M/s.S & P Foundation Pvt.Ltd.,

9/11

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

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

No.6, Amarvilla, No.4/211, MGR Street, Palavakkam, Chennai 600 041 4.The Sub Registrar, Sriperumbudur, Kancheepuram

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

lok

10/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

W.P.No.1557 of 2024

22.10.2024

11/11 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Coram

AI extract

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

CNR

HCMA010073562024

Topic

Municipal and Town Planning

Bench

G.k. Ilanthiraiyan

Disposal

DISPOSED OF

M/S.Komos Automotive India Private Limited Vs the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (Msme)

22 Oct 2024

M/s.Shri Skanda Poultry Farm Vs The District Collector

22 Oct 2024