SRIHAR NAGARAJAN Vs. MEMBER SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R. Vijayaraghaven, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. A. Kumar, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr. Durairajan, learned counsel appearing for Surana & Surana, for the second and third respondents. This writ petition is filed for a direction to forbear the first respondents from according any sanction in respect of the plan submitted by the second respondent without providing 40' Road to have access to the petitioner's property situated in Survey Nos. 71/4, 76/4, 50/1B, 51/1B to 51/1F, 74/3D, 44/1B, totalling an extent of 139.5 cents as well as the installation of sewerage treatment plant in front of one of the petitioner's property situated in Survey No. 76/4.

(2.) According to the petitioner, he is the Proprietor of Sri Velan Properties having office at No. 9/6, S.F. 1, Park View Street, Srinivasa Avenue, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai-600 028. He is holding various properties as stated in the petition at Jellidianpet, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District. India Bulls Real Estates Limited approached the petitioner for the purchase of lands to an extent of 50 acres in various survey numbers in Jellidianpet Village, Tambaram Taluk, Kancheepuram District in order to promote multi-storied residential apartment. In the abovesaid extent, 17 acres of lands were conveyed to Selene Estate Ltd., the second respondent herein, a sister concern of the said India Bulls Real Estates Ltd., jointly by the petitioner and the land owners.

(3.) It is the further case of the petitioner that he arranged for the gift in favour of Chitlapakkam Panchayat Union to an extent of 67.5 cents of lands at Jellidianpet Village by the land owners in S. Nos. 60/3, 60/5, 60/2, 61/2A, 61/2B, 62/1, 62/2 in front of the property purchased by Selene Estate Pvt. Ltd., to enable the said Company as well as the land owners in and around the said property purchased by the said Company to have a 40' public road so that all the land owners can have access and passage to their properties. In the said situation, the petitioner apprehends that as the said Selene Estate Pvt. Ltd. applied for planning permission by showing 40' road and if the same is sanctioned to the said Company, it may close the said 40' road within the limits of the properties purchased by them and the width of the said 40' road may be fenced by putting up compound wall. In that situation, the petitioner will be left with no access to his properties, if the said Company blocks the said 40' road within the boundaries of the properties.