Appeal allowed, setting aside the Single Judge's order directing parties to the Civil Court under NH Act. Court held no merit in such direction as competent authority awarded land to appellant based on evidence, while respondents produced none.
Order of the learned Single Judge is set aside; the appellant is entitled to receive the compensation.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 02.09.2021 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
W.A.No.2273 of 2018 and C.M.P. No.18149 of 2018
P.Sethupathy ... Appellant/2nd Respondent
versus
1.Nallammal
2.Poovathal
3.Sarasthal
5.K.Saraswathy
6.Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer (LA), NH 47 & 67, Coimbatore.
7.The Project Director, Project implementation Unit, Coimbatore, National Highways Authority of India, No.11/1, Kongu Nagar (Backside of Appasamy apt), Ramanthapuram,
Coimbatore - 641 045 ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 15.02.2018, passed in W.P.No.29228 of 2016.
Prayer in W.P.29228/2016:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the first respondent in proceedings Spl.DRO.Roc.319/2010 (NH-47) dated .01.2013 and quash the same as illegal, incompetent, and wholly without jurisdiction and consequently to direct the first respondent to pay the compensation to the petitioner for the lands in Survey No.727/2, Karumathampatti Village, Sulur Taluk, Coimbatore District.
For Appellant :Mr.J.Rajmohan For Respondents:Mr.V.Raghavachari for R1 to R5 Mr.T.Arunkumar Government Advocate for R6 No Appearance for R7
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.RAJA,J.)
This Writ Appeal has been filed, questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 15.12.2018, passed in W.P.No.29228 of 2016, by a learned Single Judge of this Court.
a) Ownership Report dated.02.03.2011 given by V.A.O., Karumathampatti in f/o Thiru.P.Sethupathy as per Doc.No.11212/2006;
b) Computerized Chitta, 'A' Register extract and Adangal Extract for S.F.No.727/2 in Patta No.2276 of Karumathampatti Village in f/o.Thiru.P.Sethupathy; and
c) Encumbrance Certificate No.2771 for the period from 01.01.1982 to 31.12.1986 and E.C.No.2770 dated 09.02.2011 for the period from 01.01.1987 to 08.02.2011.
Mylathal W/o.Subramaniya Gounder, claiming ownership of the property as per patta No.883. The appellant, who appeared for enquiry, on 23.12.2011, presented all the necessary documents showing his ownership and title of the land-in-question covered in S.F.No.727/2, situated at Karumathampatti Village. The appellant also requested the writ petitioners to produce the patta and other revenue records. But till date, not even a single document was produced.
petitioners did not produce any documentary evidence to prove their ownership. Therefore, the findings of the learned Single Judge that the competent authority has not given reasons is erroneous. Even, if we accept the argument of the appellant for a moment that they can approach the Competent Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act, 1956, for considering the question of apportionment of the compensation deposited by the competent authority, yet we will not be in a position to pass orders in favour of the writ petitioners for the simple reason that there is no documentary evidence produced to show that the land acquisition proceeding is against the appellant, secondly, when the competent authority has given a specific finding on the basis of the sale deed and revenue records produced by the appellant, ironically, the writ petitioners have not produced any evidence contrary thereto. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the learned Single Judge has committed an error.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar ub To
1.The Competent Authority and Special District Revenue Officer (LA), NH 47 & 67, Coimbatore.
2.The Project Director, Project implementation Unit, Coimbatore, National Highways Authority of India, No.11/1, Kongu Nagar (Backside of Appasamy apt), Ramanthapuram, Coimbatore - 641 045.
+1 CC to Mr.I. Periyasamy, Advocate sr 44753. +1 Cc to The Government Pleader sr 44565.
W.A.No.2273 of 2018
NK(CO) SP(10/11/2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a direction to approach the Civil Court under Section 3H(4) of the National Highways Act was necessary when the competent authority had already recorded evidence in favor of the appellant.
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in directing parties to approach the Civil Court despite the appellant proving ownership and the respondents failing to produce contrary evidence.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
P.Sethupathy
Nallammal
Poovathal
Sarasthal
Ramasamy
K.Saraswathy
T.RA
T.V.THAMILSELVI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
