Allowed

R.Jayakumar v. Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC9 Jul 2026WP/47088/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, whose land layout application was rejected due to high-tension lines, sought reconveyance of land gifted to the panchayat for road/open space. The Court directed the 5th respondent to execute a deed cancelling the gift deed within four weeks, as the consideration for the gift failed.

What did the court decide?

Directing the 5th respondent to execute a deed cancelling the gift deed within four weeks.

R.Jayakumar Vs Government of Tamilnadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 09-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶6

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶7

R.Jayakumar

¶8

S/o.Raji, Residing At No.70, 12th Block, A.I.R. Nagar, Ernavoor, Chennai-600 057.

¶9

..Petitioner(s)

¶10

¶11

Government Of Tamilnadu Rep. By Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶12

The Commissioner Of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶13

The District Collector District Collector Office, Tiruvallur District.

¶14

The Assistant Director Rural Development (panchayats) Tiruvalluvar District.

¶15

The Block Development Officer Minjur Panchayat Union, Tiruvallur District.

¶16

The President Kalpakkam Panchayat, Kalpakkam, Tiruvallur District.

¶17

__________ Page1 of 5

¶18

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

¶19

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶20

..Respondent(s)

¶21

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the 5th respondent to reconvey the land extend mention in the Gift deed, which was gifted vide registered gift deed bearing Doc. No. 1082 / 2021 dated 12.02.2021 registered at the office of the S.R.O Ponneri and pass such further or other orders.

¶22

For Petitioner: Mr. K.N.Pandian For Respondents: Mr. P.Siddarth, Government Counsel

¶23

ORDER

¶24

The petitioner is the owner of the lands comprised in Survey Nos. 26/2 (Old Survey No. 26 Part), 29/1, 30/1, 30/2A and 30/2B, measuring a total extent of 1.91 acres, and Survey Nos. 26/1, 26/3, 27/1 and 28, measuring a total extent of

¶25

3.50 acres, situated at Vellampakkam Village, Kalpakkam Panchayat, Tiruvallur District, by virtue of a registered sale deed.

¶26

The petitioner intended to develop the above lands by forming a residential layout under the name “Sree Hari Avenue” and, for that purpose, submitted an application to the respondents seeking approval of the layout plan. Pending consideration of the application, the petitioner executed a gift deed dated 12.02.2021 in favour of the 5th respondent, conveying the portions of land

¶27

__________ Page2 of 5

¶28

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

¶29

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶30

earmarked for roads, car parking and open space, as required for approval of the proposed layout.

¶31

Subsequently, the petitioner’s application for layout approval was rejected on the ground that high-tension transmission lines pass through the subject lands. Since execution of the gift deed was a mandatory requirement for obtaining layout approval, and the approval itself has been refused, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the land conveyed under the gift deed. Therefore, the 5th respondent is under an obligation to re-convey the gifted property to the petitioner.

¶32

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of by directing the 5th respondent to execute a deed cancelling the gift deed dated 12.02.2021, registered as Document No.1082 of 2021 in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Ponneri, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

09-07-2026

¶34

Index: Yes/No

¶35

Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ak

¶36

Page3 of 5

¶37

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

¶38

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶39

¶40

Government Of Tamilnadu Rep. By Its Secretary, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶41

The Commissioner Of Land Administration Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

¶42

The District Collector District Collector Office, Tiruvallur District.

¶43

The Assistant Director Rural Development (panchayats) Tiruvalluvar District.

¶44

The Block Development Officer Minjur Panchayat Union, Tiruvallur District.

¶45

The President Kalpakkam Panchayat, Kalpakkam, Tiruvallur District.

¶46

__________ Page4 of 5

¶47

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

¶48

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶49

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

¶50

¶51

WP No. 47088 of 2025

¶52

09-07-2026

¶53

__________ Page5 of 5

¶54

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

R.Jayakumar v. Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Jayakumar v. Government of Tamilnadu

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

S.Sathiya Vs the District Collector

T.Mohan Raj Vs Director of Town and Country

V.Venkatesan Vs the District Collector

K.Syed Abuthakir Vs the Regional Transport Officer

M/s.Growlam Office Private Limited Vs the Commissioner of Customs (Chennai Ii)Imports

S.Deena Dayalan Vs the District Collector and