Allowed

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D v. The District Collector

Madras HC8 Jul 2023WP(MD)/23260/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The National Lok Adalat settled a writ petition challenging refusal to pay enhanced land acquisition interest. The fourth respondent agreed to pay Rs. 32,67,247 within eight weeks based on a 2019 agreement. The petition was disposed of on these terms with refunds of court fees arranged.

What did the court decide?

Fourth respondent to pay Rs. 32,67,247 within eight weeks; writ petition disposed of; court fees refunded.

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D Vs The District Collector — Land Acquisition | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT LEGAL SERVICES COMMITTE, MADURAI

¶2

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625023

¶3

Saturday the 8th day of July 2023

¶4

NATIONAL LOK ADALAT AWARD

¶5

(Chapter VI and u/s 21 or Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987)

¶6

Presided Over by

¶7

The Honourable Mr Justice R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶8

and

¶9

Members

¶10

Mr.JOHN R.D.SANTHOSAM, District Judge(Retd) (Member) and

¶11

Mr.A.HAJA MOHIDEEN, (Member)

¶12

WP(MD) No.23260 of 2022 and

¶13

W.M.P(MD)Nos.17357 & 17358 of 2022

¶14

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D

¶15

...Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

1.The District Collector Tirunelveli District.

¶18

2.The District Revenue Officer Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶19

3.Rail Vikas Nigam Limited Government of India Enterprise, Tirunelveli Represented by its Deputy General Manager / Civil.

¶20

4.The Manager

¶21

Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd., Southern Railway, Chennai. ... Respondents

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

This case came up for settlement before the Lok Adalat. Both the parties present. The counsel for the petitioner Mr.H.Thayumanaswamy and the counsel for the respondents 1 & 2 Mr.J.John Rajadurai, Government Advocate and the counsel for the respondents 3 & 4 Ms.S.Vedhavalli, are present. After mutual discussion, negotiation, mediation and conciliation between both parties and with the assistance of the Bench, both sides consented for settlement.

¶24

AWARD

¶25

The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order of the second respondent/District Revenue Officer refusing to pay the enhanced interest for the land acquired for the Railways.

¶26

Now, the fourth respondent has appeared in person on behalf of the third respondent also. He had agreed to pay a sum of Rs.32,67,247/- (Rupees Thirty two Lakhs Sixty seven Thousand Two hundred and forty seven only) to the writ petitioner on the basis of the agreement dated 17.07.2019 towards interest on the basis of the land value. The fourth respondent had agreed to disburse the said amount to the writ petitioner within a period of eight weeks.

¶27

The writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶28

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D

¶29

Counsel for the Petitioner

¶30

1.The District Collector Tirunelveli District.

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

2.The District Revenue Officer Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. Government Advocate

¶33

3.Rail Vikas Nigam Limited Government of India Enterprise, Tirunelveli Represented by its Deputy General Manager / Civil.

¶34

4.The Manager

¶35

Rail Vikas Nigam Ltd., Southern Railway, Chennai. Counsel for the Respondents

¶36

This Lok Adalat award is passed in terms of the above settlement.

¶37

The full Court fee paid shall be refunded to the appellant in the manner provided under Section 69-A of the Tamilnadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 and the Court Fees Act, 1870 as provided for under sub Sec.1 of Section 21 r/w 25 of LSA Act 1987 as amended in 1994.

¶38

The Original of the award shall be place in the court record and copy of the award, kept with High Court Legal Services Committee and one copy each is furnished to both parties free of cost.

¶39

In agreement of the above, both parties and their counsel have affixed their signatures/ thumb impressions in presence of the Lok Adalat Bench admitting the terms and today conditions and accordingly, the award is passed.

¶40

JUDGE

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

MEMBER

¶43

MEMBER

¶44

To: The Parties/Advocate concerned Copy To

¶45

The District Collector Tirunelveli District.

¶46

2.The District Revenue Officer Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶47

The Officer-in-Charge, High Court Legal Services Committee, Madurai.

¶48

The Section Officer, V.R. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶49

Typed By BALAJI PA To The Hon'ble Judges

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishnu Priya Damodaran.D v. The District Collector

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

Vellala Edul. Trust, Nagercoil Vs Vellala Educational Trust

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Saravanan

Subhadra Amma, Vs Thankar Nadar (Died)

The Divisional Manager, Vs Muthulakshmi

Perumal.K Vs The District Collector

Muthulakshmi.S Vs The District Collector