Disposed

Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt. v. R Gajalakshmi IAS

Madras HC9 Dec 2016CONT P/1211/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two contempt petitions filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, the petitioner alleged non-compliance of a direction to pay compensation for acquired land. The Court held that since the Collector had issued a reasoned order after hearing the petitioner, there was no willful disobedience. The petitioners closed the contempt cases and connected miscellaneous petitions while monitorin

What did the court decide?

The contempt petitions and connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No punishment is imposed.

Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt. Vs R Gajalakshmi IAS — Property and Title | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED :09.12.2016

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶6

Cont.P.Nos.1211 and 1212 of 2016 and Sub.A.Nos.265 and 266 of 2016

¶7

M/s.Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt.Ltd., rep.by its Managing Director, Mr.R.P.Darrmalingam

¶8

... 1st Petitioner

¶9

in both the Cont.Ps.

¶10

2.Mr.R.P.Darrmalingam ... 2nd petitioner in Cont.P.No.1212 of 2016

¶11

Vs.

¶12

Tmt.R.Gajalakshmi,IAS, The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram-631 501 ... Respondent in both the Cont.Ps.

¶13

Contempt Petition No.1211 of 2016 has been filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for the wilful disobedience and violation of the order dated 01.02.2016 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3515 of 2016.

¶14

Contempt Petition No.1212 of 2016 has been filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for the wilful disobedience and violation of the order dated 03.02.2016 passed by this Court in W.P.No.3872 of 2016.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Kumar,Sr.counsel for M/s.M.Vivekanandan

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.V.Ayyadurai, Additional Advocate General-II assisted by Mr.R.M.Muthukumar

¶19

COMMON ORDER

¶20

Heard Mr.M.Vivekananda, the learned counsel

¶21

for the petitioner and Mr.V.Ayyadurai, the learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.R.M.Muthukumar, for the respondents.

¶22

These contempt petitions have been filed alleging non-compliance of the orders and directions issued in W.P.Nos.1211 and 1212 of 2016. In the said writ petitions, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ of mandamus to pay compensation for the lands, which have been acquired. The said writ petitions were disposed of by issuing the following direction:

¶23

will be a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 28.12.2015, issue notice to the petitioner and after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the authorised representative of the petitioner, pass a reasoned order on merits and in accordance

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

¶26

with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

¶27

Pursuant to such direction, the District

¶28

Collector has heard the petitioner and passed an order,

¶29

dated 04.04.2016. Thus, the petitioner has not made out any case for wilful dis-obedience of the order and direction. Yet the contempt petitions are kept pending, since this Court wanted to monitor as to what steps have

¶30

been taken by the respondents to ensure that the compensation is paid.

¶31

When the matter was pending, the respondents

¶32

thought fit to de-notify the acquisition proceedings. This has been challenged by the petitioner's wife by filing a writ petition and an interim order is operating in the said writ petition.

¶33

The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents would submit that earnest and

¶34

genuine attempts have been made by the respondents to bring about an amicable solution to the matter, since a vast extent of property is involved. It is further submitted that even prior to the initiation of acquisition

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

¶37

proceedings, the petitioner has sold substantial extent of property and there are about more than 700 purchasers and negotiations are going on.

¶38

The fact that the respondents have acquired

¶39

the lands conscious of the sales effected by the

¶40

petitioner, it is within their realm to sought out the issue. In any event, since the matter is under progress, the respondents should ensure that the same is taken to the logical end so that the petitioner/land owners are paid adequate compensation as well as other purchasers.

¶41

With the above observation, the contempt petitions are closed. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶42

JOINT REGISTRAR(OS)

¶43

msk

¶44

//Certified to be true copy//

¶45

Dated at Madras this the day of 2017.

¶46

From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. Sm/CO/11/01/2017

¶47

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶48

¶49

To,

¶50

The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram-631 501

¶51

One CC to M/s.Vivekanandan,, Advocate, Sr.No.14977.

¶52

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt. v. R Gajalakshmi IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jubilee Plot and Housing Pvt. v. R Gajalakshmi IAS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Fugro Survey (India) Vs Indian Gas Limited

M/S. L & T Finance Ltd. Vs Mr. Muralikrishnan

Equitas Finance Limited Vs Neeraj Kumar Deswal

Hdfc Bank Ltd. Vs S. Malathi

Life Insurance Corporation of Vs The Official Liquidator

S.S.R.Polytechnic College Vs M/S. Cholamandalam Invest