Madras High Court
K.Jayakumar vs T.Srinivasan on 13 June, 2022
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. KUMARESH BABU
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
and
C.M.P.No.19608 of 2019
K.Jayakumar ... Appellant
Vs.
1.T.Srinivasan
2.The Commissioner,
Maraimalar Nagar Municipality,
Maraimalar Nagar,
Chengelput Taluk,
Kancheepuram District. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order
dated 01.08.2019 made in W.P.No.21509 of 2019.
For Appellant : Mrs.R.T.Shyamala
For R1 : Mr.A.Jenasenan
For R2 : Mr.P.Srinivas (for Municipality)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by T. RAJA, J.)
This writ appeal is directed against the impugned order, dated
01.08.2019, made in W.P.No.21509 of 2019, in and by which, the learned
Single Judge has categorically held that, if the writ petitioner is going to put up
a gate within his property and not going to intrude upon the public road, the
appellant/2nd respondent therein can have no objection for the same and he has
no right of objection also. Challenging the same, the writ appeal has been filed.
2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that,
when the 1st respondent, without getting any sanction from the concerned
authority, had demolished his compound wall and put up a gate, thereby
making a new ingress and egress in the road situated in the backside of his
compound wall, the same is to be considered as change of ingress and egress to
his property. Continuing her arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant
would submit that there is no sanction plan for the 1st respondent to have an
access from his backyard and without getting sanction from the 2nd respondent,
a new door was opened in the backside road to have an access to the backside
road and further, it is the dead end of the road, in which, if the gate is put up, it
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
will affect the appellant herein, whose door is on that road.
3.We do not find any merit or justification in the submissions made
by the learned counsel for the appellant. The reason is so simple that, when the
writ petitioner is the owner of Plot No.MIG 144, as long as he is not going out
of his land boundaries, he is entitled to raise compound wall not exceeding 2
metres. It is relevant to extract Rule 10(5) of Tamil Nadu Combined
Development and Building Rules, 2019, hereunder :
“10.Sanction : ... (5) No building permission is necessary for
the following alterations, which do not otherwise violate any
provisions regarding general building requirements, structural
stability and fire safety requirements of this Rule;
(a) plastering and patch repairs;
(b) re-roofing or renewals of roof including roof of
intermediate floors at the same
height;
(c) flooring and re-flooring;
(d) opening and closing of windows, ventilators and doors
not opening towards other's properties and / or public road
or property;
(e) replacing fallen bricks/stones
(f) construction or re-construction of sunshade not more
than 75cms. in width within one's land and not overhanging
over a public street;
(g) construction or re-construction of parapet not more than
1.5 m. in height and also construction or re-construction of
boundary wall not exceeding 2 m
(h) white-washing, painting, etc. including erection of false
ceiling in any floor at the permissible clear height provided
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
the false ceiling in no way can be put to use as a loft etc.”
4.A perusal of the above clearly shows that no such permission is
necessary for minor alterations which do not otherwise violate any provisions
regarding general building requirements, structural stability and fire safety
requirements. Rule 10(5)(d) states that, for opening and closing of windows,
ventilators and doors not opening towards other's properties or public road, no
such permission is necessary. Rule 10(5)(g) also states that, for construction or
re-construction of parapet not more than 1.5 m in height and for construction or
re-construction of boundary wall not exceeding 2 m, no such permission is
required. Therefore, we do not find any error in the impugned order passed by
the learned Single Judge.
5.Therefore, the writ appeal fails and stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(T.R., J.) (K.B., J.)
13.06.2022
mkn
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
Speaking order / Nonspeaking order
To
The Commissioner,
Maraimalar Nagar Municipality,
Maraimalar Nagar,
Chengelput Taluk,
Kancheepuram District.
T. RAJA, J.
and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
K. KUMARESH BABU, J.
mkn
W.A.No.3079 of 2019
13.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
