Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V.Karthikeyan, K.Rajasekar, JJ
Special Tahsildhar (Land Acquisition) Unit IV – Appellant
Versus
Rajamanickam – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural background and development of land acquisition litigation. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. valuation methodology and reliance on additional evidentiary documents. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 3. applicability of 2013 act versus 1894 act in compensation determination. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. impermissibility of developmental charge deductions in public infrastructure projects. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 5. final fixation of compensation based on judicial consistency and guideline values. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
COMMON JUDGMENT
1.These appeals have been preferred by The Special Tasildhar (Land Acquisition) Unit IV, Chenai and the Member Secretary, Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority, Chennai, challenging the Judgment and Decree in a batch of Land Acquisition Original Petitions dated 02.07.2021 on the file of the Principal District Court at Tiruvallur.
2. The land of the respondents had been acquired for the purpose of laying the Outer Ring Road by the Second appellant/Chennai Metropolitan Development Authority in Thiruninravur Village. The notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Ac
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
