BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, N. SENTHILKUMAR
District Collector, Dindigul District – Appellant
Versus
Subbulakshmi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.
Aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P(MD)No. 16646 of 2015, dated 06.02.2020, the State has preferred the above Writ Appeal.
2. It is the case of the Writ Petitioner/respondent that the property in S.No. 44/1 in Ottanchathiram Village measuring to an extent of 1 acre and 45 cents originally belonged to her mother, Anjalai Ammal. The said property was acquired by the Government in the year 1989 by Award No.1 of 1992, dated 24.04.1992 passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, namely, Revenue Divisional Officer, Palani, in which, the respondent's mother's property has been arrived as Item No.7. The Writ Petitioner/respondent's mother had claimed a sum of Rs.10,000/- per cent as compensation. However, the said claim was referred to the competent Civil Court under Section 18 of the LAND ACQUISITION ACT for enhanced of compensation.
3. It is the further case of the Writ Petitioner/respondent that her mother died on 29.12.2006 leaving behind her as her only legal heir and therefore, the Writ Petitioner/respondent claimed that she is entitled for all the claims over the subject property. The Writ Petitioner/respondent contended that as
Mohammed Hasnuddin vs State of Maharashtra
Officer on Special Duty (Land Acquisition) and another vs Shah Manilal Chandulal and others
Steel Authority of India Limited -vs- Sutni Sangam and others
A legal heir is entitled to claimed compensation based on promises made by land acquisition authorities, regardless of significant delay, emphasizing principles of equity and promissory estoppel.
The court affirmed that delays in filing compensation claims under the Land Acquisition Act can be overlooked in favor of equitable treatment, preserving citizens' property rights under Article 300A.
Compulsory acquisition of land – If any individual is to be divested or deprived of said right by State, it ought not be done without giving compensation in accordance with law for land so acquired f....
The judgment emphasizes that lapsing provision under Section 11A does not apply to acquisitions made by Nagpur Improvement Trust under NIT Act, while also highlighting entitlement to compensation for....
The court emphasized that failure to follow mandatory procedures in land acquisition invalidates the award, highlighting the necessity of proper notifications and consideration of market value as per....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the right to compensation for expropriation of property is guaranteed under Article 300A of the Constitution of India, and delay in seeking....
Subsequent purchasers of land can only claim compensation based on their vendors' titles and cannot challenge acquisition proceedings initiated under different statutes.
Sections 12 read as award of Collector when to be final.
Co-owners of jointly acquired land entitled to same judicially determined enhanced compensation as awarded to one co-owner via reference and appeal, even without own application under Section 18 or 2....
The court ruled that the State Land Acquisition Officer cannot shift the date for determining compensation; only higher courts possess that authority under Articles 32/142 of the Constitution.
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.