{"id":181628,"date":"2003-03-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-03-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003"},"modified":"2018-03-31T23:39:25","modified_gmt":"2018-03-31T18:09:25","slug":"masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","title":{"rendered":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 28\/03\/2003\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA\n\nWRIT PETITION No.40573 OF 2002\nWPMP.NO.60178 OF 2002\nAND\nWVMP.NO.495 OF 2003\n\nMasseys,\nNo.17, North Railway Terminus Road,\nRoyapuram,\nChennai 600 013.\nRep. by its Partner                     ..  Petitioner\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. The Corporation of Chennai,\n   rep. by the Commissioner,\n   Rippon Building,\n   Chennai 600 003.\n\n2. The Zonal Officer,\n   Division No.22,\n   Zone-II,\n   Corporation of Chennai,\n   47, Basin Bridge Road,\n   Chennai 79.                  ..  Respondents\n\n        Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for  the\nissuance of Writ of Mandamus as stated therein\n\nFor Petitioner :  Mr.Vijay Narayan\n\nFor Respondents :  Mr.P.  Sundaram\n\n:J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n<p>        Though the matter was listed for considering the petition filed by the<br \/>\nrespondents to vacate the interim order, since the same question was involved,<br \/>\non consent of the counsels appearing for the parties, the writ petition itself<br \/>\nwas heard on merit and is being disposed of by the present judgment.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.   The  petitioner  has  prayed  for  issuing  a  Writ  of  Mandamus<br \/>\nforbearing the respondents from constructing a lavatory block on the footpath,<br \/>\nadjacent to the entrance at No.17, North  Railway  Terminus  Road,  Royapuram.<br \/>\nThe petitioner is an Engineering Company engaged in the manufacture of granite<br \/>\nproducts  and  has  established warehousing, clearing and forwarding services.<br \/>\nIt is stated that in the first week of October, 2002,  the  petitioner  found<br \/>\nthat  adjacent  to the compound wall, just at the entrance to the complex, the<br \/>\nrespondents were constructing  Public  Lavatories.  The  petitioner  filed  a<br \/>\nrepresentation  to  the respondents on 12.10.2002 stating that public lavatory<br \/>\nshould not be constructed at the said place.  It was alleged that large number<br \/>\nof lorries and trailers carrying heavy cargo move in and out every month.   It<br \/>\nwas  further alleged that about 200 workers were working inside the campus and<br \/>\nconstruction of a public lavatory would be a major health  hazard  because  of<br \/>\nwater  stagnation,  mosquitoes, flies and the diseases usually associated with<br \/>\nsuch pests.  It is further stated that even though a representation was  made,<br \/>\nno reply has been received.  Therefore, a writ of Mandamus or appropriate writ<br \/>\nshould  be issued forbearing the respondents from constructing public lavatory<br \/>\nat the said place.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.  The main contention raised by the learned  counsel  appearing  for<br \/>\nthe petitioner is to the effect that the Corporation has no right to construct<br \/>\nlavatories  on the footpath and such construction is not permissible under the<br \/>\nlaw.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.  In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents it has<br \/>\nbeen stated:\n<\/p>\n<p>         3.    The  public  convenience  under  construction   is   for   the<br \/>\neconomically weaker   section   at  Chettithottam.    The  Public  Convenience<br \/>\nconstruction is nearer to the Bus Shelter, Royapuram Railway Station and  also<br \/>\nuseful  for the thousands of road users of that area including vehicle riders.<br \/>\nThere is no lavatory block in the near vicinity.  This  construction  is  away<br \/>\nfrom  the  entrance  of  the  petitioners  Company entrance and situated at a<br \/>\ndistance at 8.50 Metres.  also there  is  5.70  Metres  width  from  the  road<br \/>\nmargin.<\/p>\n<p>It has been further stated:\n<\/p>\n<p>               4.  .  .  .  Because the location in which the construction is<br \/>\ncarried  out  is  used  as  an  unauthorised  parking lot for the Trailers and<br \/>\nLorries of the Petitioners company.  He has no right to do so.  He  wants  to<br \/>\nprevent  the  construction  under  the  strength of the orders of this Honble<br \/>\nCourt.  There is no health hazard or danger in constructing the lavatory block<br \/>\neither to the public or to the petitioner.  In fact, the  same  would  improve<br \/>\nthe social condition of the nearby economically weaker sections.<\/p>\n<p>                5.   Learned  counsel  appearing for the petitioner by relying<br \/>\nupon the decision reported in A.I.R.  1985 Madras 23 <a href=\"\/doc\/1255461\/\">(M.A.  PAL  MOHAMMED  AND<br \/>\nOTHERS v.   R.K.    SADARANGANI  AND OTHERS)<\/a> has contended that members of the<br \/>\npublic, including the petitioner, have right to  use  the  footpath  and  such<br \/>\nright should not be hampered by constructing lavatories.\n<\/p>\n<p>                6.  A careful perusal of the decision makes it clear that  the<br \/>\ndecision instead of supporting the contention raised by the petitioner, rather<br \/>\nindicates  that  there  is no absolute embargo on the Corporation to construct<br \/>\npublic convenience on the roadside.\n<\/p>\n<p>In paragraph 17, it is further observed :\n<\/p>\n<p>         17.    It is interesting to note that in Halsburys Laws of England,<br \/>\nFourth Edition, Volume 21, at page 700, by reference  to  S.5(2)  of  Highways<br \/>\nAct,  it is stated that the concerned Council can provide in any street in its<br \/>\narea,  on  land  abutting  such  streets,  advertisement   units,   showcases,<br \/>\ninformation  boards  and  other  similar  structures, and may let out any such<br \/>\nstructure on such terms and conditions as it deems fit.  .  .  .<\/p>\n<p>It is further observed in paragraph 21:\n<\/p>\n<p>         21.  The other point taken is that, a member of the public  has  the<br \/>\nright to  pass  and  repass  over  every  inch of the street.  This concept is<br \/>\nsubject to several restrictions that could be  imposed.    The  definition  of<br \/>\npublic street embraces within its fold not merely a footway but a roadway; the<br \/>\ndrains;  that  portion  of  the  and which is either covered or not covered by<br \/>\npavement; veranda or other structures; and a riding path etc., If  the  common<br \/>\nlaw  principle  of  right  over  every inch of a public street is accepted and<br \/>\nimplemented, in respect of a public street as defined under S.2(20), a  member<br \/>\nof the public would claim that he has a right to walk in the roadway or over a<br \/>\nflower  bed  or  other structures erected by public authorities for regulating<br \/>\ntraffic in a public street.  How is this concept of right over every  inch  is<br \/>\nto be  understood and enforced?  In a public street, for the absolute needs of<br \/>\npublic, authorities are duty bound to locate post boxes,  fire  hydrants  with<br \/>\nwater  tanks,  milk  booths,  bus  or  jutka or cycle stands, rubbish bins and<br \/>\ntelephone booths, etc.  etc.  Areas covered by these  public  facilities  form<br \/>\npart of  the  public  street.    Hence  subject  to  restrictions contemplated<br \/>\nregarding user of these facilities, no member  of  the  general  public  could<br \/>\nclaim that  he  has  the  right  to trade upon every inch of them.  Apart from<br \/>\nthat, for public benefit, electricity fuse boxes are located, car parks,  taxi<br \/>\nor cycle  stands  are provided, in public streets.  Here again, the right over<br \/>\neach inch of them, would be subject to certain restrictions.  Apart from them,<br \/>\npublic conveniences,  advertisement  hoardings  are  also  erected.    Traffic<br \/>\nroundabouts,  display  boards,  are required for regulating vehicular traffic,<br \/>\nand therefore, as to in what manner  a  public  street  could  be  enjoyed  by<br \/>\ngeneral  public  and which portions of it are to be earmarked for which manner<br \/>\nof use, are administrative decisions.  It would be preposterous to  hold  that<br \/>\nthe  public  have a right of movement over every inch of a public street, once<br \/>\nformed, and that no restriction could be imposed, confining  their  rights  to<br \/>\npass and repass, only along  specified  earmarked  portions.    .    .    .<br \/>\n(Emphasis added)<\/p>\n<p>                7.  If the aforesaid observations are applied to  the  present<br \/>\ncase, it seems that there is no justification in the contentions raised by the<br \/>\npetitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>                8.    In  the  counter  affidavit  it  has  been  specifically<br \/>\nindicated that lavatories are being constructed at a place which is more  than<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">5<\/span><\/p>\n<p>metres away  from  the  entrance  gate of the petitioner.  It has been further<br \/>\nindicated that between the tar  portion  of  the  road  and  the  place  where<br \/>\nlavatories  are constructed, sufficient space is available, and therefore, the<br \/>\nright of the public in utilising the pathway would not be hampered.\n<\/p>\n<p>                9.   In  course  of  hearing,  the  learned  counsel  for  the<br \/>\npetitioner  has  submitted that within 40 metres, lavatories have already been<br \/>\nconstructed and there is no<\/p>\n<p>necessity to construct these lavatories at the present place.    The  question<br \/>\nregarding  suitability of the place for construction of lavatories is a matter<br \/>\nwithin the discretion of the Corporation authorities and  it  cannot  be  said<br \/>\nthat such discretion has been arbitrarily exercised.\n<\/p>\n<p>                10.   Learned  counsel  for  the petitioner has also contended<br \/>\nthat since many lorries would be coming to the  premises  of  the  petitioner,<br \/>\npossibility  of accident occurring, particularly in respect of children, looms<br \/>\nlarge.  This apprehension appears to be farfetched.\n<\/p>\n<p>                11.  Learned counsel for the  petitioner  has  also  contended<br \/>\nthat  construction of lavatory would also create health hazard for the workers<br \/>\nand other members of the public.  There is no doubt that when  the  lavatories<br \/>\nare constructed by the Corporation, it would maintain such lavatories properly<br \/>\nso  as not to cause any health hazard to the residents of the locality and all<br \/>\nproper precautions would be taken.\n<\/p>\n<p>                12.  For the aforesaid reasons, I do not  find  any  merit  in<br \/>\nthis writ  petition, which is accordingly dismissed.  The interim order stands<br \/>\ndissolved.  No costs.  Consequently, miscellaneous petitions are closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Index :  Yes<br \/>\nInternet :  Yes<\/p>\n<p>dpk<\/p>\n<p>To\n<\/p>\n<p>1.  The Corporation of Chennai,<br \/>\nrep.  by the Commissioner,<br \/>\nRippon Building,<br \/>\nChennai 600 003.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.  The Zonal Officer,<br \/>\nDivision No.22,<br \/>\nZone-II,<\/p>\n<p>Corporation of Chennai,<br \/>\n47, Basin Bridge Road,<br \/>\nChennai 79.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28\/03\/2003 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. MISRA WRIT PETITION No.40573 OF 2002 WPMP.NO.60178 OF 2002 AND WVMP.NO.495 OF 2003 Masseys, No.17, North Railway Terminus Road, Royapuram, Chennai 600 013. Rep. by its [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-181628","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003\",\"datePublished\":\"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\"},\"wordCount\":1354,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\",\"name\":\"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003","datePublished":"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003"},"wordCount":1354,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003","name":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2003-03-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-31T18:09:25+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/masseys-vs-the-corporation-of-chennai-on-28-march-2003#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Masseys vs The Corporation Of Chennai on 28 March, 2003"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181628","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=181628"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/181628\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=181628"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=181628"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=181628"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}