Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 71791
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. Sounthar, J
Philo Selvaraj – Appellant
Versus
The Sub Collecotr – Respondent
C.R.P.(MD)Nos.1516 and 1517 of 2026|C.M.P(MD)Nos.7398 and 7402 of 2026
Important Points
Subject
Civil - Land Acquisition
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Reference of Compensation - Section 30 of the 1894 Act vs Section 64 of the 2013 Act - Where the award was passed under the 1894 Act and possession was taken prior to the commencement of the 2013 Act, the reference remains governed by the 1894 Act. (Para 6, 8)
(C) Plea of Fraud - Fabricated Documents - Allegations of fraud must be specifically raised and established by cogent evidence; such pleas cannot be entertained in a revision petition if they were not raised during the relevant earlier proceedings. (Para 7)
Issues: Whether the reference made under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was untenable and should have been made under Section 64 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: J. John
For the Respondents: S.I. Muthiah
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the validity of a reference made under the 1894 act versus the 2013 act. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. possession of land prevents the lapsing of acquisition proceedings under section 24(2) of the 2013 act. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. prior judicial findings on possession and payment are binding on the parties. (Para 5) |
| 4. reference under section 30 of the 1894 act is valid if proceedings have not lapsed. (Para 6) |
| 5. allegations of fraud must be specifically pleaded and proven by cogent evidence. (Para 7) |
| 6. the date of the award determines whether the 1894 act or 2013 act governs the reference. (Para 8) |
| 7. dismissal of the revision petitions based on the non-applicability of the 2013 act. (Para 9) |
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to L.A.O.P.No.17 of 2020 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli, to strike off the same as being without jurisdiction and an abuse of process of law. Consequently, this Court may be pleased to direct the respondent to determine the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and to make a reference under Section 64 of the said Act, 2013 and allow this Civil Revision Petition.
C.R.P(MD).No.1517 of 2026
1.Philo Selvaraj
2.J.N.Selvaraj .. Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Sub Collector, Neighborhood Schemes
O/o. Sub-collector office Tirunelveli
Tirunelveli District.
2.Glory Esther Ammal
3.T.Rajasingh
4.Rajagopal
5.V.A.Ganapathy
6.A.Alagesa Boopathy
7.T.Gomathinayagam
8.T.Santhi
9.V.Thangaraja
10.Thilagavathi Sekaran
11.D.Pitchaimuthu
12.L.Mani
13.Mariammal
14.B.Subbukutti
15.G.Subhalakshmi
16.A.Gopalan
17.S.Subbiah
18.A.Muthumani Gnaniah
19.M.Subramanian
20.K.Paulraj
21.M.Manickavasagam
22.Prema Paulraj
23.V.Bhangaraju
24.K.Mangannu
25.Kothandaraman
26.K.Pappa
27.Jansi
28.S.Rajkumar
29.A.Subramanian
30.S.Tharmaraj
31.P.Devadoss
32.P.Thangam
33.S.Shanmugasundaram
34.Y.Lordu Samy
35.K.Karthiresan
36.R.Selvaraj
37.B.Soundar
38.S.Vasanthalakshmi
39.T.Natarajan
40.J.A.Arul Segar
41.T.Vedarani
42.A.Jeganathan
43.J.Mary Gracy
44.Esakki
45.Kunjammal
46.Krishna Konar
47.J.Annammal
48.A.Vargis Durai
49.S.Santharaman
50.M.Swamydhas
51.B.Kanagaraj
52.Renjitham
53.K.P.Bharathi
54.T.Helbert Pandian
55.Kulandai Alwar ... Respondents (R2 to R9, R11 to R34 and R39 to R56 in case of as well as in the interim relief. Hence, notice may be given up in CRP)
PRAYER: Civil Revision Petition is filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India, to call for the records relating to L.A.O.P.No.18 of 2020 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli, to strike off the same as being without jurisdiction and an abuse of process of law. Consequently, this Court may be pleased to direct the first respondent to determine the compensation in accordance with the provisions of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, and to make a reference under Section 64 of the said Act, 2013 and allow this Civil Revision Petition.
In both petitions For Petitioners : Mr.J.John
For Respondents : Mr.S.I.Muthiah Govt. Advocate (civil side)
* * * * *
COMMON ORDER
1. These Civil Revision Petitions have been filed to strike off a reference made under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act in L.A.O.P. Nos.17 and 18 of 2020 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Tirunelveli.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners' land was acquired for the purpose of a Neighborhood Scheme. Though the acquisition proceedings were initiated in the year 1989, the compensation has not b
