V DEENADAYALAN Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is for a direction against the 1st and 2nd respondents to remove unauthorised construction stated to have been put up by the 3rd respondent, who is the owner of the neighbouring land at No.12, Krishnapuram Street, Choolaimedu, Chennai 94.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he is the owner of the land and building situated at Plot No.7, measuring about 1 ground and 80 Sq.ft. situated at No.109, Puliyur village, Kodambakkam, Chennai in Old Paimesh No.227, Block No.21, New T.S.No.59, Narayanapuram, having purchased in the year 1973 in the name of his wife. It is stated that the adjoining backyard of the petitioner's house was a vacant site belonging to one Neelakanta Rao and his elder brother Nagaraja Rao. It is the case of the petitioner that the said adjacent owners having decided to put up a structure through Contractors 'Smart Homes' has requested the petitioner to render all help and assistance and the petitioner infact helped the neighbour to put up the construction. However, the petitioner came to know later on that the neighbour has put up construction with deviations from the approved plan by which the window of the adjacent owner has been put up vertically in line with the compound wall of the petitioner with the result, the right of free air and light which has been enjoyed by the petitioner hitherto has been obstructed. It is also stated that in the adjacent house when the 3rd respondent has put up construction, the sewerage pipes and sewerage chambers were put up by knocking down the compound wall belonging to the petitioner, about which the petitioner has made a complaint to the Corporation. THErefore, the case of the petitioner is that the 3rd respondent has put up the unauthorised construction against the approved plan, which has obstructed the right of the petitioner in having free air and light.

(3.) IN such view of the matter, the relief sought for in this writ petition cannot be granted to the petitioner. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed, however, with liberty to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law either by approaching the Civil Court or by preferring a complaint to the Corporation, in which event, it is for the authorities to take appropriate action in the manner known to law. No costs.