The Special Tahsildar v. v.Alagumalai
Case brief
What is this about?
The Madurai Bench confirmed the award and decree dated 26/04/2004 passed by the Land Acquisition Claims Tribunal/Principal Subordinate Judge, Dindigul, noting the matter had reached finality pursuant to a prior order in a similar case.
What did the court decide?
The award and decree dated 26/04/2004 passed in L.A.O.P. No. 40 of 1990 are confirmed; No costs.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
A.S.(MD). No.624 of 2011
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Wednesday, the Second day of December Two Thousand and Twenty PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice M.GOVINDARAJ A.S.(MD). No.624 of 2011
The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Chettinaickanpatti Scheme Dindigul . ...Appellant/Referring Officer
Vs
V. Alagumalai, S/o.Vellaiya Pillai, Chettinaickenpatti Village, Dindigul Taluk.
...Respondent/Claimant
Prayer :- This Appeal Suit filed under Sec. 54 of Land Acquisition Act, against the award and decree Dated 26/04/2004, passed in L.A.O.P. No. 40 of 1990 on the file of the Court of the Land Acquisition Claims Tribunal / Principal Subordinate Judge, Dindigul.
ORDER:- This Appeal coming up for hearing on this day and upon perusing the grounds of Appeal, the award of the Tribunal and the material papers relating to this case and upon hearing the arguments of Mr. J. Gunaseelan Muthiah, Additional Government Pleader for the Appellant and of Mr. P. Athimoolapandian, Advocate for the respondents; this Court having observed that there is nothing more to adjudicate upon the matter, which has already been settled and has reached finality, and while disposing of the Appeal Suit in terms of the order passed by this Court in The Special Tahsildar (LA), Chettinaickanpatti Scheme, Dindigul Vs. M. Suruttaian and others, reported in 2002(4) LW 121, doth order and decree as follows:
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appealed award of 26/04/2004 should be allowed to proceed or settled based on previous precedent.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
The Special Tahsildar Land Acquisition Chettinaickanpatti Scheme Dindigul
- respondent
V. Alagumalai
Coram
M. GOVINDARAJ
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court