M. M. SUNDRESH, NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH
Government Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By Its Secretary, Transport Department – Appellant
Versus
P. R. Jaganathan & Ors Etc. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contract governs compensation under 1997 act (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. background of land acquisition and agreements (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. parties' arguments on compensation and interest (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. analysis of contractual obligations and interest (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. supreme court decision on the appeal (Para 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
3. The issue for consideration in these appeals is: Whether a party to a concluded contract, voluntarily and statutorily entered into, can seek further relief by taking refuge under the statutory provisions?
Section 7 of the 1997 Act
Section 12 of the 1997 Act
5. Section 7 of the 1997 Act is an exhaustive provision dealing with the determination of amount of compensation to be paid to the landowner or person interested over an acquired land. Sub-section (2) of Section 7 of the 1997 Act encourages and facilitates the determination of the amount payable to the owner or person interested through an agreement with the Government. It further stipulates that upon such an agreement, the resultant amount will have to be paid only as per the terms agreed, thereunder. Under sub-section (3) of Section 7 of
G. Mohan Rao & Ors. versus State of Tamil Nadu & Ors
Union of India and Others v. N. Murugesan and Others
Ranveer Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2016) 14 SCC 191 [Para 24]
Indore Development Authority v. Manoharlal and Others
State of Karnataka and Others v. Sangappa Dyavappa Biradar and Others
NOIDA Industrial Development Authority v. Ravindra Kumar
State of Gujarat and Others v. Daya Shamji Bhai and Others (1995) 5 SCC 746 [Para 24]
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.