Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
Narender Kumar Bisani - Petitioner
Versus
The District Collector, Kancheepuram - Kancheepuram District & Ors. - Respondents
W.P. No. 33023 of 2012
Decided On : 18-06-2024
Writ Petition - Land Acquisition - The court addressed the legality of the compensation awarded for land acquisition, emphasizing that the petitioner, having participated in negotiations and accepted the compensation, could not later claim a recalculation based on square footage. The court upheld the validity of the original compensation award, reinforcing the principle that acceptance of negotiated compensation precludes subsequent claims for adjustment.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the order of the Special Tahsildar regarding land acquisition compensation, arguing for a recalculation based on square footage despite having previously accepted a negotiated amount.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had participated in negotiations and accepted the compensation awarded in 2010, thus ruling that the claim for recalculation was not valid.
Issues: Whether the petitioner could claim a recalculation of compensation after accepting the negotiated amount during the land acquisition process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that acceptance of negotiated compensation precludes any subsequent claims for recalculation, reinforcing the finality of negotiated agreements in land acquisition cases.
Result: The writ petition was dismissed, and the order of the Special Tahsildar was upheld.
ORDER :
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
[PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent proceedings in Na.Ka.No.07/2007/A dated 17.08.2012 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to pay the difference of compensation with interest.]
The order of the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition), Sriperumputhur dated 17.08.2012 is sought to be quashed in the present writ petition.
2. It is not in dispute between the parties that the land acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1997 and the land belonged to the petitioner was acquired and award was passed on 09.06.2010.
3. Mr. A. Selvendran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2 would contend that the petitioner participated in the negotiation meeting held before the District Collector and after negotiation, he received the compensation in the year 2010 itself.
4. Therefore, now, the petitioner cannot turn around and set out a claim by stating that the compensation is to be calculated based on the square feet rate. Such claim made after accepting the negotiated amount and on receipt of the same cannot be accepted. Thus, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Acceptance of negotiated compensation in land acquisition proceedings bars subsequent claims for recalculation based on different criteria.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of the Land Acquisition Officer to conduct an inquiry under Section 9 of the Land Acquisition Act to resolve disputes regarding compensati....
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
