Disposed

Kalavathi, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC19 Aug 2019WP/16951/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court addressed writ petitions seeking reconveyance of acquired land. Noted that redemption of land via compensation deposit was a more feasible course than direct reconveyance. Directed respondents to deposit the award amount within twelve weeks and disposed of the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to deposit the award amount as per the decree dated 7.7.2009 within twelve weeks from receipt of this order.

Kalavathi, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 19.08.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

¶5

W.P.Nos.16951 and 16952 of 2011
And
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2011
Kalavathi ... Petitioner in W.P.No.16951/2011
Gunduraju ... Petitioner in W.P.No.16952/2011
Vs.
1.Government of Tamil Nadu
By Secretary Housing and Urban Development,
Fort St.George, Chennai. ...1 st Respondent in both theW.Ps.
2.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)
Housing Scheme, Hosur,
Tamil Nadu Housing Scheme,
Hosur. ...2 nd Respondent in W.P.No.16951/2011
2.The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Tamil Nadu
Housing Scheme, Hosur ...2 nd Respondent in W.P.No.16952/2011
3.The Executive Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Hosur.
4.Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
By its Chairman,
493, Anna Salai,
Nandanam, Chennai – 35.
(R4 – Impleaded as per Order
dated 28.10.2011 by VDPJ in
MPs.2/11 (2 MPs) in W.Ps.16951
and 16952 of 2011) ... Respondents 3&4 in both the W.Ps.
Prayer in W.P.No.16951 of 2011:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

¶6

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

¶7

India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to reconvey the lands situated at Hosur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri District 1)Dry Survey No.240/1 – Hectares 0.90.0 2) Dry Survey No.241/1 – Hectares 0.37.0 3) Dry Survey No.241/2 – Hectares 0.05.0 (Total Hectares 1.32.0) acquired from the petitioner to the petitioner and restores her possession thereof in view of non payment of compensation as per the decree and judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court, Madras in A.S.No.125/2000 dated 7.7.2009.

¶8

Prayer in W.P.No.16952 of 2011:

¶9

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to reconvey the lands situated at Hosur Village, Krishnagiri Taluk, Krishnagiri District 1)Dry Survey No.240/1 – Hectares 0.90.0 2) Dry Survey No.241/1 – Hectares 0.37.03) Dry Survey No.241/2 – Hectares 0.05.0 (Total Hectares 1.32.0) acquired from the petitioner to the petitioner and restores his possession thereof in view of non payment of compensation as per the decree and judgment passed by the Hon'ble High Court, Madras in A.S.No.125/2000 dated 7.7.2009.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.Surana and Surana

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai for R1 and R2 Government Advocate Dr.R.Gowri for R3 and R4

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the prayer sought for in these writ petitions are not maintainable. Hence, it would suffice if this Court issues a direction to the respondents to deposit the amount awarded by this Court in A.S.No.125 of 2000 on 07.07.2009.

¶13

2.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 conceded to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

¶14

3.Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, I am not inclined to issue any positive direction in favour of the petitioners. However, I am inclined to issue a direction to the respondents to deposit the award amount as per the decree and judgment passed by this Court in A.S.No.125 of 2000 dated 07.07.2009, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

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

¶16

4.The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-VI)

¶18

//True Copy//

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar
pri
To
1.The Secretary, Housing and Urban Development,
Fort St.George, Chennai.
2.The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)
Tamil Nadu Housing Scheme,
Hosur.
3.The Executive Engineer,
Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
Hosur.
4.Tamil Nadu Housing Board,
By its Chairman,
493, Anna Salai,
Nandanam, Chennai – 35.
+2cc to Mr.Surana and Surana Advocate, S.R.No.70881, 70882
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.71211
NRL(CO)
CB(25/09/2019)
W.P.Nos.16951 and 16952 of 2011
And
M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2011

¶20

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

Kalavathi, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalavathi, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

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

Sri Vidhya Academy Vs the Assistant Executive

N.Balasundaram Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

G.Durai, Vs the Commissioner

Tmt.Ravi Elizabeth, Vs the Union of India

V.a.Nalini Vs the Chairman

T.Thamizhinian, Vs the Inspector of Panchayats