Back
D. KRISHNAKUMAR, P. B. BALAJI
V. Anantharaman – Appellant
Versus
Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Rep. by its Member Secretary, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 09.09.2020 in W.P.No.10065 of 2020)
D. Krishnakumar, J.
1.The appellant herein has earlier filed a writ petition in W.P. No. 10065 of 2020 challenging the impugned letter issued by the 1st respondent dated 04.03.2020, directing the petitioner to furnish ''No Objection Certificate'' from the 2nd respondent/TNHB for the purpose of considering the application submitted by the appellant seeking for planning permission. The said writ petition was dismissed by the writ Court by order dated 09.09.2020 on the ground that the acquisition proceedings has been upheld by the Division Bench in the Writ Appeals and the compensation amount has also been deposited before the competent Civil Court. Challenging the said order the writ court, the present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant had purchased the subject property by way of a registered sale deed dated 30.09.1988 from one Mrs. Charumathi Rajamani. Since he wanted to develop the property, he entered into a Development Agreement and executed a Power of Attorney in favo
A subsequent purchaser has no right to challenge the original acquisition or claim any benefits under the Land Acquisition Act 1894. The sale transaction after the issuance of the Section 4(1) notifi....
Subsequent purchasers post-notification under the Land Acquisition Act cannot challenge acquisition proceedings, as such sales are deemed void and they may only seek compensation.
Subsequent purchasers cannot challenge land acquisition proceedings, and the lapse of acquisition proceedings under Section 24(2) of the Fair Compensation Act depends on the fulfillment of possession....
Once the land is acquired and vests in the State, it cannot be divested, and subsequent purchasers have no authority to challenge the acquisition proceeding.
Subsequent purchasers of land cannot challenge acquisition proceedings if the purchase occurred after the Notification under Section 4, as such sales are void against the State.
A purchaser of the land after the issuance of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has no right to challenge the acquisition proceedings and can only claim compensation. Any....
No reasonable explanation being given by the petitioners for such inordinate delay, this court should not go into the stale demand of the petitioners after lapse of years.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
