S. SRIDHAR AND ORS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.
EmailAppeal: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2854 OF 2015
Petitioner: S. SRIDHAR AND ORS
Respondent: STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS.
Judges: ANIL R. DAVE , AMITAVA ROY
Date of Judgment: Mar 13, 2015
JUDGEMENT:
NON- CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2854 OF 2015 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.35672 OF 2014]
S. SRIDHAR AND ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
ANIL R. DAVE, J. Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the appellants are occupiers of 9 shops which have been constructed on the ground floor, though according to the sanctioned plan, only 5 shops could have been constructed on the ground floor on the land in question. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that instead of 5 shops, in all 19 shops have been constructed on the ground floor and therefore, the construction is not according to the sanctioned plan. It has also been fairly submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation that the total construction on the ground floor is lesser than what had been sanctioned earlier. Be that as it may, the shop owners have already submitted an application for regularisation of their 9 shops on 09.03.2015. The said application for regularisation shall be considered by the respondent-Corporation within three months from today in accordance with law and if the construction of the shops cannot be regularised as per the bye-laws/regulations of the respondent- Corporation, the said construction shall not be regularised. Till the final decision is taken on the application for regularisation, the shops in question shall not be demolished. Rs. 3.5 lakhs have been deposited by the appellants in the Registry of this court in a non-interest bearing account. Out of the said amount, Rs. 3 Lakhs be returned to the appellants and Rs.50,000/- be paid to the respondent-Corporation as costs by an account payee cheque. In view of the above direction, the appeal stands disposed of as allowed to the above extent.
…………………..J. [ ANIL R. DAVE ]
…………………..J. [ AMITAVA ROY ]
New Delhi; March 13, 2015.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2854 OF 2015 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.35672 OF 2014]
S. SRIDHAR AND ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND ORS. Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
ANIL R. DAVE, J. Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that the appellants are occupiers of 9 shops which have been constructed on the ground floor, though according to the sanctioned plan, only 5 shops could have been constructed on the ground floor on the land in question. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that instead of 5 shops, in all 19 shops have been constructed on the ground floor and therefore, the construction is not according to the sanctioned plan. It has also been fairly submitted by the learned counsel for the respondent-Corporation that the total construction on the ground floor is lesser than what had been sanctioned earlier. Be that as it may, the shop owners have already submitted an application for regularisation of their 9 shops on 09.03.2015. The said application for regularisation shall be considered by the respondent-Corporation within three months from today in accordance with law and if the construction of the shops cannot be regularised as per the bye-laws/regulations of the respondent- Corporation, the said construction shall not be regularised. Till the final decision is taken on the application for regularisation, the shops in question shall not be demolished. Rs. 3.5 lakhs have been deposited by the appellants in the Registry of this court in a non-interest bearing account. Out of the said amount, Rs. 3 Lakhs be returned to the appellants and Rs.50,000/- be paid to the respondent-Corporation as costs by an account payee cheque. In view of the above direction, the appeal stands disposed of as allowed to the above extent.
…………………..J. [ ANIL R. DAVE ]
…………………..J. [ AMITAVA ROY ]
New Delhi; March 13, 2015.
