Parties in a dispute over compensation for land acquisition should approach the competent court to establish their rights and determine the disbursement of the compensation amount.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent pertaining to the Award No.C4/007/2022 dated 22.09.2022, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry and determine the compensation payable to the petitioner herein, being the Mortgagee under a Registered Mortgage Deed dated 28.04.2016, registered as Document Nos.1416/2016 and 1417/2016 and consequently pay the compensation payable to respondents 4 to 7 herein, in respect of all that piece and parcel of land comprised in R.S.No.1654/9, Mylapore Division bearing Old Door Nos.123 and 124, New No.110, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004, to the petitioner herein, in accordance to the Transfer of Property Act, SARFAESI Act and the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997. [Prayer amended vide order of Court dated 03.08.2023 made in WMP No.21276 of 2023 in WP No.28953 of 2022])

The amended relief sought for in the present writ petition is to call for the records of the second respondent pertaining to the Award No.C4/007/2022 dated 22.09.2022, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry and determine the compensation payable to the petitioner herein, being the Mortgagee under a Registered Mortgage Deed dated 28.04.2016, registered as Document Nos.1416/2016 and 1417/2016 and consequently pay the compensation payable to respondents 4 to 7 herein, in respect of all that piece and parcel of land comprised in R.S.No.1654/9, Mylapore Division bearing Old Door Nos.123 and 124, New No.110, Luz Church Road, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004, to the petitioner herein, in accordance to the Transfer of Property Act, SARFAESI Act and the Tamil Nadu Acquisition of Land for Industrial Purposes Act, 1997.

2. With reference to the amended prayer, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the tenth respondent-State Bank of India raised preliminary objection that the relief as such sought for in the present writ petition to settle the entire amount in favour of the writ petitioner is untenable, since the tenth respondent-State Bank of India holds primary charge over the property. They are the first charge holders. Thus the relief as such sought for cannot be considered by this Court.

3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ninth respondent made a submission that the Company belonging to respondents 4 to 7 are under liquidation and the Official Liquidator has already initiated action.

4. The present writ petition is emanated on account of the acquisition proceedings initiated by the second respondent-Chennai Metro Rail Limited for the development of Metro Rail Project in Chennai City.

5. It is not in dispute that the land belonging to respondents 4 to 7 were already acquired and the compensation determined by the Land Acquisition Officer had been deposited in the Court having jurisdiction. Further, it is not in dispute that a reference has already been made at the instance of the landowners and LAOP No.199 of 2022 is pending on the file of the learned Principal District Judge, City Civil Court at Chennai.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly contended that they are holding first charge in respect of the loan borrowed by respondents 4 to 7 and therefore, they may be permitted to withdraw the compensation amount deposited by the Land Acquisition Officer.

7. It is not in dispute that a criminal case has been registered against the Company namely, M/s.Nathella Sampath Jewellery Private Limited (R-4 and R-6) and one Mr.Ranganath Gupta under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and the Enforcement Directorate admittedly had attached the subject properties by invoking the provisions of Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The said case is also pending on the file of the Special Court for PMLA Cases at Chennai.

8. In this backdrop, the