The history of the property and documents related are given below.
1. Property consists of all that piece and parcel of property situated at Third Seaward Road, Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai- 600 041, originally comprised in Paimash No.1355/E, then
Survey No.211/12 [part], currently comprised in T.S.No.68 (Part), Block No.62, in Thiruvanmiyur Village, Mylapore-Triplicane Taluk, Chennai District, and measuring 60 cents originally belonged to Mr. T. S. Swaminatha Iyer, son of Sri. T. Sadasiva Iyer, he having purchased the Schedule A property from Mr. Panchanatha Chettiar, son of Mr. Murugasamy Chettiar, vide a Deed of Sale dated 30/06/1961, Registered as Doc.No.1651/1961, in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet.
2. Under the aforementioned Sale Deed an extent of 50 cents from out of the Schedule A property was purchased by the said Mr. T. S. Swaminatha Iyer, but as the said Mr. T. S. Swaminatha Iyer was in the possession and enjoyment of the total extent of 60 cents, Patta was granted in his favour for an extent of 60 cents by an Order dated 31/08/1964, in the Proceedings of the Special Assistant Settlement Officer, Chengelpet in S.R.No.16/Sec-11[a]S.D.T./64. This document is not available with me at this time
3. Subsequently the above named Mr. T. S. Swaminatha Iyer conveyed the property in favour of Dr. K. S. Narendra in the following manner:
[3a] An extent of 50 Cents [9 Grounds] vide Sale Deed dated 24/08/1961, Registered as Doc. No. 2184/1961, in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet and
[3b] The remaining extent of 10 Cents [2-2/3 Grounds] vide Sale Deed dated 30/10/1961, Registered as Doc. No. 2932/1961, in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet
4. As there was a mistake in the description of Survey Number in the aforementioned documents, a Deed of Rectification dated 21/07/1964, was executed by the said Mr. T. S. Swaminatha Iyer in favour of the above named Dr. K. S. Narendra and the same was registered as Doc. No. 2321/1964, in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet.
5. Subsequently the above Dr. K. S. Narendra conveyed the property in favour of Kamlu Atmaram Lalwani vide Sale Deed dated 29/06/1967, Registered as Doc.No.2456/1967, in the Office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet.
6. Subsequently Patta bearing No.1094 was granted in favour of Kamlu Atmaram Lalwani in regard to the property, as per which the property was comprised in Survey No. 211/12 - measuring 60 cents or thereabouts.
7. Subsequently as the property was affected by a Notification of the TNHB, Kamlu Atmaram Lalwani had filed W. P. No. 12445/1986, on the file of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, challenging the acquisition notification and seeking the quashing of the same. The said Writ Petition was allowed and the acquisition proceedings were quashed vide the Order of High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 24/10/1991.
8. The Government of Tamil Nadu went on Appeal and the High Court of Judicature at Madras vide its Order dated 17/09/2008 in Writ Appeal No. 406/1997 dismissed the said Writ Appeal thereby confirming the above mentioned order passed in W. P. No. 12445/1986.
9. Kamlu Atmaram Lalwani settled the said property in favour of her son Anil Atmaram Lalwani, the current owner of the property by Deed of Settlement, dated 28.9.2010, registered as Document No.7282 of 2010 in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Saidapet, Chennai.
10. Having paid the necessary fees, on 14 Oct 2010, Anil Atmaram Lalwani wrote to TNHB enclosing copy of the judgment above and payment receipt asking for NOC to enable him to apply for Patta.
11. As TNHB did not respond within the required period, Anil Atmaram Lalwani filed W. P. No. 5119 of 2011 the High Court of Judicature at Madras which vide its order dated 3/3/2011 directed TNHB to consider his application and pass appropriate orders on merit within 4 weeks
12. On 23/6/2011 TNHB wrote to Anil Atmaram Lalwani that his request to issue NOC was not feasible of compliance as TNHB had filed a review petition under S.R No 45851/2011
13. On 24/7/12, the High Court of Judicature at Madras passed an order dismissing Review Application 97 of 2012 mentioning that at the time of hearing the writ appeal Government Pleader submitted that since the scheme itself was dropped, the Government was not interested in pursuing the appeal.