VEERASWAMI, NATARAJAN
Y. Venkanna Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
Government of India by Military Estates Officer. Madras – Respondent
VEERASWAMI, C. J.:- The matter is placed before us by the Master for a decision on the proper Court-fee payable on the Memorandum of Appeal. The appellant's land was requisitioned under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952. Aggrieved by the alleged inadequacy of compensation under Section 8 as determined by the Arbitrator, the appeal has been preferred under Section 11. The contention is that as this Act makes a difference between requisitioning and acquisition, it should borne in mind in determining the scope of Section 51 of the Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suits Valuation Act.
2. Section 3 of the Requisitioning Act provides for the power to requisition any immovable property and on such requisitioning, the appropriate authority can under Section 4 take possession. Rights over the requisitioned property are defined by Section 5. Release from requisitioning is made under Section 6. Where the property requisitioned needs to be acquired for a public purpose, power therefore is found in Sec. 7. Section 8 provides the principles and method of determining the compensation and in this section no difference is made between requisitioning and acquisiti
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.