Madras High Court
Gururaj vs The District Collector on 7 October, 2021
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICIATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.10.2021
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
and
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI
W.A.No.2447 of 2019
Gururaj
represented by his Power of Attorney
Vanniyaraj ... Appellant
versus
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District.
2.The Special Thasildar (LA),
Ponneri Taluk,
Thiruvallur District.
3.Vanniyaraj
4.Devikani ... Respondents
(R3 and R4 suo motu impleaded as party respondents
vide Court order dated 23.10.2019 made in W.A.
No.2447/2019 (NKKJ & PVJ))
Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order
dated 06.02.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. No.3431 of
2019.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
For Appellant : Mr.T.Saravanan
For Respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan,
Government Advocate
for R1 and R2
Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen for R3
Mr.R.S.Anandhan for R4
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by T.RAJA,J.)
This writ appeal has been directed against the impugned order dated
06.02.2019 passed in W.P. No.3431 of 2019.
2.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the
property situated at S.No.654/2D, Thiruvottiyur High Road,
Goundarpalayam Village, Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District to an extent
of 0.01.0 hectares was acquired by the Highways Department for the
Panchatty Highway Scheme through the Special Thasildar (LA), Thiruvallur
District, the second respondent herein. With this background, when the
appellant came to this Court for issuance of writ of mandamus seeking a
direction to the respondents therein to refer the petition dated 12.12.2018 of
the appellant to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
Act, 1894 for deciding enhancement of compensation for the land acquired
from the appellant, the same was refused by the learned Single Judge on the
ground that the petitioner has not made any objection during award enquiry
and therefore, he is not entitled to any relief. Challenging the same, the
present appeal has been filed. Reiterating the same stand, the learned
counsel appearing for the appellant sought for interference with the
impugned order.
3.Learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, who is suo
motu impleaded by this Court, submitted that the third respondent is the
husband of fourth respondent and he had filed a suit in O.S. No.57 of 2000
before the Sub Court, Ponneri against the fourth respondent seeking for a
declaration declaring that he has the right over the suit property. Although
an exparte decree was passed in favour of the third respondent on
21.08.2000, it is not known as to why the fourth respondent has not filed
any appeal to set aside the exparte order and now the same had become
final. Hence, the learned counsel for the third respondent prays for dismissal
of this appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
4.Learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent, who is also
suo motu impleaded by this Court, by filing a counter affidavit, submitted
that the fourth respondent purchased a property in Survey No.654/2D
measuring an extent of 10 cents in Gounderpalayam, No.144, Vallur II
Village, Meenjur Firka, Ponneri Taluk by way of a Sale Deed dated
14.07.1993 registered as Document No.1939 of 1993 before the Sub
Registrar Office, Thiruvotriyur and she has developed the same by
constructing residential house and two shop premises. While so, she
received a show cause notice to take part in the enquiry to be held on
10.08.2007, in which, the appellant herein was also called for the enquiry.
After verification of her documents, the second respondent found that she is
entitled for compensation for the land acquired. Pending the acquisition
proceedings, since the third respondent herein attempted to interfere with
the possession of the said property, the fourth respondent filed a suit in O.S.
No.197 of 2008 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Ponneri for
permanent injunction against the third respondent. In the said suit, even
after receipt of notice, as the third respondent failed to appear, he was set
exparte and an exparte decree was passed on 18.09.2008. Against the same,
when the third respondent filed a Civil Revision Petition in C.R.P. No.462
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
of 2013 before this Court, by order dated 12.02.2019, this Court dismissed
the same. Subsequently, the appellant alleged to have submitted a
representation, which was represented by his power agent Vanniyaraj, the
third respondent herein requesting the first respondent to refer the matter to
Court for enhancement of the compensation. Subsequently, when the
appellant filed the above writ petition in W.P. No.3431 of 2019 before this
Court represented by his power agent, the same was dismissed on
06.02.2019 and as against the same, he has filed the present Writ Appeal.
Therefore, the learned counsel prays for dismissal of this appeal.
5.Heard Mr.T.Saravanan, the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant, Mr.V.Manoharan, learned Government Advocate appearing for
R1 and R2, Mr.R.Abdul Mubeen, learned counsel appearing for R3 and
Mr.R.S.Anandhan, learned counsel appearing for R4
6.It is the claim of the appellant that the land in question was
purchased by him under a Sale Deed dated 07.01.2002 and the same was
acquired by the Highways Department for the Panchatty Highway Scheme
through the Special Thasildar (LA), Thiruvallur District, the second
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
respondent herein. Thereafter, he made a claim in the Award Enquiry and
requested to pay the compensation.
7.A perusal of the Award dated 21.10.2009 passed by the Land
Acquisition Officer and District Collector, Tiruvallur shows that in the
Award Enquiry, Devikani, the fourth respondent herein had appeared and
given her statement, by producing a copy of the Document No.1939 dated
14.07.1993 for having purchased the above land and she has not produced
any documentary evidence to substantiate her claim. In the said enquiry, she
has stated that a suit is pending regarding ownership of the land.
8.The above Award further reveals that the appellant through his
counsel has filed a petition stating that the property was purchased by him
from Vanniaraj, husband of Deivakani as per Document No.47/2002 dated
07.01.2002 and requested to pay the compensation and the counter claim
put forth by the fourth respondent cannot be entertained. It further reveals
that the dispute regarding ownership of the property comes under Section
21(2) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001 and therefore, the amount of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
compensation as worked out therein was ordered to be kept under C.C.D.
under Section 22(3) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001.
9.It is seen that when the third respondent, husband of fourth
respondent had filed a suit in O.S. No.57 of 2000 before the Sub Court,
Ponneri against the fourth respondent seeking for a declaration declaring
that he has the right over the suit property, an exparte decree was passed in
favour of the third respondent on 21.08.2000. However, the fourth
respondent herein also filed a suit in O.S. No.197 of 2008 on the file of the
District Munsif Court, Ponneri for permanent injunction against the third
respondent and in the said suit, the third respondent was set exparte and an
exparte decree was passed in favour of the fourth respondent on 18.09.2008.
When the appellant has come to this Court with the above W.P. No.3431 of
2019, the learned Single Judge finding that the appellant has not made any
objection during award enquiry and therefore, he is not entitled to any relief,
has dismissed the said writ petition.
10.Since it is a clear case of dispute regarding the ownership of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
property and therefore, in the award enquiry, it was observed that the
T.RAJA,J.
and
T.V.THAMILSELVI,J.
vga
amount of compensation as worked out therein was ordered to be kept under
C.C.D. under Section 22(3) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act 2001 and the
same was ordered to refer the case to the Sub Court, Ponneri for taking
decision, we are unable to entertain this appeal. Moreover, no one has given
any proper explanation whatsoever for not approaching this Court for the
past ten long years. Therefore, the conclusion reached by the learned Single
Judge that the appellant has not made any objection during award enquiry
and therefore, he is not entitled to any relief, cannot be found fault with.
Accordingly, this writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
[T.R.,J] [T.V.T.S.,J]
07.10.2021
vga
To
1.The District Collector,
Thiruvallur District.
2.The Special Thasildar (LA),
Ponneri Taluk,
Thiruvallur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A. No.2447 of 2019
W.A.No.2447 of 2019
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
