Madras High Court
M/S. Mohan Breweries And Distilleries ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 20 March, 2025
Author: S. M. Subramaniam
Bench: S. M. Subramaniam
WA No. 1231 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-03-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
WA No. 1231 of 2024
and
CMP.No.9053 of 2024
1. M/s. Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Ltd.,
Rep by its Executive Chairman,
Mr. M. Nandagopal, 3 rd Floor,
No.605 and 606, Sundaram Avenue, Chennai 6.
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep by the Secretary to Government
Housing Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai 9.
2.The Tamil Nadu Housing Board
Rep by its Chairman, No.493, Anna
Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 35.
Respondent(s)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
WA No. 1231 of 2024
PRAYER
To allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the Order dated 06.11.2023 passed in
WP No.748 of 2017.
For Appellant(s): Mr.Kuberan For Rank Associates
For Respondent(s): Mr.R.Ramanlaal Aag Vii Asst By
Mr.T.Arunkumar Agp For R1
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
Under assail is the order dated 06.11.2023 passed in W.P.No.748 of 2017.
2. The Writ Petition has been instituted by the appellant before this
Court to declare that the land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect of the land belonging to the petitioner
comprised in,
Survey No. Extent Sale Deed No
33 0.66 1612 of 1988
33 0.66 1614 of 1988
34 1.62 5744 of 2002
44/1(44/1A) 3.77 5744 of 2002
45/3 1.15 5744 of 2002
(45/3C1)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
Survey No. Extent Sale Deed No
31 0.30 2502 of 1993
94/1A 0.70 492 of 1987
94/2A 0.44 492 of 1987
99/3 0.85 492 of 1987
104 4.24 492 of 1987
213/1 0.75 2464 of 1984
213/2 2.10 2464 of 1984
217/2 0.28 621 of 1984
All in Valasarawakkam Village, Chennai, as lapsed, in view of Section
24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition,
Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013 (Act 30/2013).
3. The uncontroverted facts are that land acquisition proceedings
under the Old Act commenced in respect of the subject property in the year
1975. The Government in G.O.Rt.No.136, Housing Department, dated
14.05.1975, approved the Draft Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
Acquisition Act for an extent of 248.18 Acres of land in Valasaravakkam
Village, Maduravoyal Taluk, Thiruvallur District, for the formation of New
Ramapuram Neighbourhood Scheme by Tamil Nadu Housing Board. It was also
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
published on 11.06.1975. The Draft Declaration and Direction under Sections 6
and 7 of the Land Acquisition Act was approved by the Government in
G.O.Ms.No.963, Housing Department, dated 07.06.1978 and published in Tamil
Nadu Government Gazette, dated 09.06.1978. After observing all the formalities
under the Land Acquisition Act, Award Nos.4/86 dated 05.09.1986 and 12/86
dated 29.09.1986 were passed. The subject lands comprised in S.Nos.213/1,
213/2 and 217/2 are covered in the aforesaid awards passed by the Land
Acquisition Officer. The possession of the said lands were taken by competent
authorities and handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board on 13.11.1986
and 15.12.1986 and since then the subject land vests with Tamil Nadu Housing
Board.
4. Particulars such as ownership, extent, compensation amount etc., in
respect of the subject land are categorically stated in the counter affidavit filed
by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board in W.P.No.748 of 2017 as under,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
SI.No Survey No Total Extent in Extent cover in Award No & Name of Award Amount Possessio Patta Name & Patta
Award this Present date Owner as per & Nature of n taken No.
Court case Award Deposit over date
1 31/2 2.19 0.30 5/86 Eastern Clay Rs.581.05 24.04.2007 Mohan Brewaries &
16.9.86 Works and Civil Court Distilleries Ltd.,
persons & 3699)
2 33 1.32 1.32 5/86 Rs.350.20 24.04.2007
Dhanakoti
16.9.86 Civil Court
Ammal, Rathna
deposit
Naicker &
Narayana
Naicker
3 34 1.62 1.62 6/86 M/s.Sudarsan Rs.93,387.10 24.04.2007 Mohan Brewaries &
19.9.86 Trading Civil Court Distilleries Ltd.,
& 3699)
4 44/1A 3.86 3.77 8/86 Rs.8,36,189.85 24.04.2007 Mohan Brewaries &
19.9.86 Civil Court Distilleries Ltd.,
& 3699)
5 45/3C1 1.15 1.15 7/86 Rs.48,837.10 24.04.2007 M/s.Sudarsan
17.9.86 Civil Court Trading Company
Deposit (Patta No.119)
6 94/1A 0.70 0.70 9/86 V.Samasiva Rs.50,036.00 Not taken TNHB (Patta
10.9.86 Rediyar Civil Court over No.1462)
Deposit
14.11.1986
7 104 4.24 4.24
8 99/3 0.85 0.85 19/86 V.Samasiva Rs.225.60 23.1.1987
23.9.86 Rediyar Civil Court
Deposit
9 94/2A 0.44 0.44 8/86 Rs.116.35 14.11.1986
20.8.86 Civil Court
Deposit
10 213/1 0.75 0.75 4/86 Venkata Rathina Rs.755.15 13.11.1986
5.9.86 Naidu, Civil Court
Subbammal; Deposit
Palavalli
11 213/2 2.10 2.10 Rajeswari,
M/s.Mohan
Brewaries
12 217/2 0.82 0.28 12/86 Govindaraja Rs.217.50 15.12.1986 S.Govindaraja Pillai
22.9.86 Naicker Revenue & Others (Patta
D.Divakar, Deposit No.1104)
Muthulakshmi
Ammal &
M/s.Mohan
Breweries
5. Batch of Writ Petitions filed challenging the land acquisition by the
erstwhile owner was allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on
08.10.1991. The Writ Appeal in W.A.No.707 of 1995 filed by the Requisitioning
authority, Tamil Nadu Housing Board against the order of the learned Single
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
Judge was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court on 26.07.2001 and thus,
the land acquisition proceedings in respect of land in Valasaravakkam Village
attained finality.
6. After a lapse of about 42 years from the date of land acquisition
proceedings, the appellant filed in WP.No.748 of 2017, on the ground that the
acquisition proceedings lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the New Land
Acquisition of the year 2013. The Writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition,
recording the facts relating to the acquisition proceedings and formed an
opinion that the claim of the appellant is stale. Thus, the present Writ Appeal
came to be instituted.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant would mainly contend that the
possession still remains with the appellant. Admittedly, the appellant is the
subsequent purchaser purchased the land after 4(1) notification issued by the
Government under the Land Acquisition Act. The Housing Board project is
dropped, and the possession is presently with the petitioner. The Distilleries
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
Company is running in the name of M/s.Mohan Breweries and Distilleries
Limited. As per the Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.180, Housing
Board, dated 04.10.2024, the petitioners are also eligible to avail the benefit for
re-conveyance of the acquired land. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for the
relief.
8. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the
State would oppose by stating that the claim of the appellant is stale. The 4(1)
notification under the Old Act was issued in 1975, and the award was passed in
1986. The possession was taken and handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing
Board by the Land Acquisition Officer, and the compensation amount was
deposited in the Civil Court deposit. Therefore, the twin conditions
contemplated under Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act had been
complied and thus, the learned Single Judge has rightly dismissed the Writ
Petition.
9. Section 44(A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 provides
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
restriction on transfer etc and reads as under,
“No Company for which any land is acquired
under this Part shall be entitled to transfer the said
land or any part thereof by sale, mortgage, gift, lease
or otherwise except with the previous sanction of the
appropriate Government.”
10. In view of the express bar imposed under Section 16(A) of the
Land Acquisition Act, the subsequent purchase of the property under land
acquisition is null and void. Consequently, the purchase of the subject property
by the petitioner is rendered invalid.
11. In respect of Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act, in the
present case, even as per the counter filed by the State in the Writ Proceeding,
the Civil Court deposit was made, and particulars are clearly given. Though
possession was taken and handed over to the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, the
petitioner's claim of being in possession cannot be construed as legal
possession, but rather amounts to an encroachment of the property belonging to
the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, which is the requisitioning body.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
12. As per the ratio laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in the case of Indore Development Authority Vs.
Manoharlal And Others1, settled cases cannot be reopened after the lapse of
many years. It is sufficient if any one of the conditions contemplated under
Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition Act has been applied with.
13. Regarding the compensation, it was deposited in the Civil Court
deposit. As for the possession of a subsequent purchaser, it amounts to an
encroachment of public property. Therefore, a subsequent purchaser, whose
purchase is expressly barred under Section 16(A) of the Old Land Acquisition
Act, cannot claim to the benefit of Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition
Act.
14. Regarding the claim of the petitioner, who is a subsequent
purchaser and purchase of the property barred under Section 16(A) of the Old
Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Land and Building
1 2020 (8) SCC 129
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
Department through Secretary and Another Vs Attro Devi and Others2 held as
follows,
“12......The vesting of land with the State is with
possession. Any person retaining the possession thereafter
has to be treated trespasser. When large chunk of land is
acquired, the State is not supposed to put some person or
police force to retain the possession and start cultivating on
the land till it is utilized. The Government is also not
supposed to start residing or physically occupying the same
once process of the acquisition is complete. If after the
process of acquisition is complete and land vest in the State
free from all encumbrances with possession, any person
retaining the land or any re-entry made by any person is
nothing else but trespass on the State land....”
15. Therefore, the case of the petitioner is not falling within the ambit
of the conditions stipulated under Section 24(2) of the New Land Acquisition
Act. The occupation of the petitioner is illegal, and the respondents are bound to
initiate all appropriate actions to remove the encroachers and utilize the land for
the purpose for which it was acquired or for any other public purpose, subject to
obtaining necessary orders from the Government.
2 2023 SCC ONLINE 396
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
16. Consequently, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Post the matter
on 21.04.2025 under the caption 'for reporting compliance'.
(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(K.RAJASEKAR J.)
20-03-2025
gd
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
To
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep by the Secretary to Government
Housing Department, Fort St.George,
Chennai 9.
2.The Tamil Nadu Housing Board
Rep by its Chairman, No.493, Anna
Salai, Nandanam, Chennai 35.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
J.
AND
K.RAJASEKAR J.
gd
20-03-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 08/04/2025 04:23:51 pm )
