Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 27-01-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA
Vijayaraghavan Petitioner(s) Vs The Executive Engineer Tamilnadu Housing Board, Hosur. Respondent(s) PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondent to issuance the No Objection certificate and consequently direct the respondent to execute the Sale Deed pertaining to the House No.LIG 159 favour of legal heirs of Late Venkatraman. For Petitioner: Mr.J.Pradeep For Respondent(s): Mr.A.M.Ravindranath Jayapal, Standing Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent to issue ‘No Objection Certificate’ and consequently direct the respondent to execute the Sale Deed pertaining to the House No.LIG 159 in favour of legal heirs of Late Venkatraman.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that his father late K.Venkatraman was allotted a housing plot under the LIG Scheme in Harur Housing Development
Project and he was directed to pay a sum of Rs.1,07,900/- as a sale consideration and the allotment was made on 31.12.1997 on the payment of initial sale consideration of Rs.32,370/-. As per the terms of the allotment, the petitioner’s father therefore required to pay the balance amount in a span of 14 years on monthly installment of Rs.1107/- and monthly maintenance was fixed at Rs.120/-. It is also stated that his father was meticulous and prompt in paying the installments. The petitioner by the said benevolent housing scheme constructed the house and was residing there till his demise and the family has been occupying the premises for the past nearly three decades.
3. While so, the respondent had made a demand for further payment and
had threatened to dispossesses the petitioner’s father which prompted him to file a suit for bare injunction in O.S.No.216 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif, Harur. The suit was also decreed on 06.01.2012. Without challenging the impugned order, the petitioner’s claims for issuance of sale deed to enable Registration and execution, has not been acceded to and on the demise of his father the petitoner has stepped in as a sole legal heir and has come forward with the aforesaid writ petitioner, is be acceptable.
4. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
5. The very allotment letter would clearly show that what was fixed is
only the tentative cost which was subject to escalation. Therefore, the first premise on which the writ petition has been filed, cannot be sustained as the cost fixed earlier was only tentative cost.
6. After arguing the matter, the learned for the petitioner agrees to pay the sum demanded to get the sale deed executed.
7. Considering the fact that the petitioner now agrees to pay sum demanded no further orders are required passed in this petition. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. vum Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No To 1.The Executive Engineer Tamilnadu Housing Board, Hosur P.T.ASHA J. vum