SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Mad) 3805

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SUDHAKAR
J. Rajan Babu & Another
Versus
Union of India, represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Home, Transport & Highways & Others
Writ Petition Nos.4566 to 4569 of 2011 & M.P.No.1 of 2011 in all Writ Petitions
Decided on : 30-08-2011

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:T.V. Ramanujam, Senior Counsel for T.V. Krishnamachari, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1 - J. Ravindran, Advocate, R2 - M. Dhandapani, Special Government Pleader, R3 - P. Wilson, Additional Advocate General.

Headnote:

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ACT, 1956 - ACQUISITION OF LAND - DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION - OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE EVIDENCE - SECTION 3G(7) - COMPLIANCE - WRIT PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY - LIS PENDENS - APPLICABILITY.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners filed writ petitions challenging the acquisition proceedings initiated by the respondents under the National Highways Act, 1956, alleging non-compliance with the Court's earlier order directing the competent authority to determine the market value of the acquired land after permitting the petitioners to produce documentary and oral evidence, and violation of the principles of natural justice.

Finding of the Court:

1. The competent authority had given sufficient opportunity to the petitioners to produce evidence in support of their claim for market value, as directed by the Court in its earlier order. 2. The petitioners failed to utilize the opportunities provided to them and did not produce any further evidence or request to let in oral evidence. 3. The competent authority was not required to furnish all evidence relied upon by them to the petitioners before passing the award. 4. The doctrine of lis pendens was not applicable as the award was passed before the writ petitions were admitted and no interim order was granted restraining the authority from passing the award.

Issues: 1. Whether the competent authority complied with the Court's earlier order directing it to determine the market value of the acquired land after permitting the petitioners to produce evidence? 2. Whether the principles of natural justice were violated in the acquisition proceedings? 3. Whether the competent authority was required to furnish all evidence relied upon by them to the petitioners before passing the award? 4. Whether the doctrine of lis pendens was applicable to the present case?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The competent authority had given sufficient opportunity to the petitioners to produce evidence in support of their claim for market value, as directed by the Court in its earlier order. The petitioners failed to utilize the opportunities provided to them and did not produce any further evidence or request to let in oral evidence. Therefore, the plea of violation of the Court's order and the principles of natural justice failed. 2. The competent authority was not required to furnish all evidence relied upon by them to the petitioners before passing the award. The petitioners could have challenged the award on the ground that the competent authority had not considered the evidence produced by them, but they did not do so. 3. The doctrine of lis pendens was not applicable to the present case as the award was passed before the writ petitions were admitted and no interim order was granted restraining the authority from passing the award.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed.

JUDGMENT :-

1. Writ Petition Nos.4566 and 4567 of 2011 are filed praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the entire enquiry proceedings conducted by the second respondent in respect of proposed acquisition of the petitioner's lands morefully described in the schedule of the accompanying writ petition under the National Highways Act, 1956 is null and void for not following the directions of this Court passed in W.P.No.13286 of 2009 and W.P.No.16678 of 2010 by common order dated 25.1.2011.

2. Writ Petition Nos.4568 and 4569 of 2011 are filed praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the entire enquiry proceedings conducted by the second respondent in respect of proposed acquisition of the petitioner's lands morefully described in the schedule of the accompanying writ petition under the National Highways Act, 1956 is null and void for not following the directions of this Court passed in W.P.No.13186 of 2009 and W.P.No.16679 of 2010 by common order dated 25.1.2011.

3. The relief sought for in all the four writ petitions are one and the same. By consent of all parties, all the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.


4. The brief facts of the case in W.P.Nos.4566 and 4567 of 2011 are as follows:-Petitioner, Mr.J.Rajan Babu, is the absolute owner of the land and building in Survey Nos.425/3, 425/4 and T.S.No.51/2, Ammapet Rural Village, Salem Taluk, Salem District. He purchased the same by way of sale deed dated 5.9.2005. Petitioner sold some portion of the above property to his sister B.Ramya, the fifth respondent (deleted at the instance of the petitioner) by way of registered sale deed dated 29.12.2006. The fifth respondent sold some portion of the above property to another sister S.Priya, the fourth respondent (deleted at the instance of the petitioner) by way of registered sale deed dated 27.12.2007. Accordingly, the petitioner and his sisters are in possession of the above properties. The above properties were proposed to be acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956. The paper publication under Section 3(A)(3) was made on 13.6.2008 for the Notification dated 6.5.2008 issued under Section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956. The petitioner gave his objections on 8.7.2008 which was rejected on 5.9.2008. The Notification under Section 3D was published in the Gazette on 4.5.2009 and consequently publication was made in terms of Section 3G(3) of the Act on 5.6.2009. According to the petitioner, the Competent Authority without considering petitioner's objection attempted to fix the compensation for the lands proposed to be acquired arbitrarily. Hence, petitioner filed W.P.No.13286 of 2009 for the following relief:-

"That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, in the nature of a writ, directing the 2nd respondent to give opportunity to the petitioner to place all the documents showing their right, title, and interest for the lands described in the schedule of the accompanying petition proposed to be acquired and also produce relevant materials regarding the market value of the lands for fixing the compensation, through our legal practitioner on the day to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court which are to be considered before determining the amount payable to the petitioner for lands proposed to be acquired under The National Highways Act 1956 and pass such other suitable orders as this Honourable Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice." (emphasis supplied)

5. Petitioner further submits that for the very same project NH-68 different portion of petitioner's lands in Survey Nos.425/3 and 425/4 comprised in T.S.No.51, Ammapet Village, Salem District, were proposed to be acquired under the National Highways Act, 1956 and publication was made in terms of section 3-A of the National Highways Act, 1956 on 2.12.2009 and publication under Section 3G of the National H







































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top