Madras High Court
The Special Tahsildar vs Venkatachalam on 29 October, 2025
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 15.10.2025, 17.10.2025 and 22.10.2025
Pronounced on : 29.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
and
C.M.P. Nos. 3816, 3990, 4004, 4010 and 4127 of 2020
A.S. No. 268 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar, (L.A)
Unit II Arasu Cements Factory,
Ariyalur. ... Appellant
Vs
1. Venkatachalam,
S/o. Muthvelkonar,
Nerinchikorai Village,
Ariyalur Taluk & District.
2. Managing Director,
Arasu Cements Corporation,
No.735, II Floor, LLA Building,
Annasalai,
Chennai.
3. Deputy General Manager,
Arasu Cements Factory,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in L.A.O.P.
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
No.83 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. R.Kumaravel,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 & R3)
A.S. No. 295 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 3816 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit – II,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur. ... Appellant
Vs
1. Perumal,
S/o.Saminathan
Velipringiyam,
Ariyalur Taluk & District.
2. Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
No.735, II Floor, LLA Building,
Anna Salai, Chennai.
3.Deputy General Manager,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the Judgment and Decree passed in L.A.O.P.
2/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
No. 51 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
PRAYER in C.M.P.: Petition filed under Order 41 Rules 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, to stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in
L.A.O.P. No. 51 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the Sub Court, Ariyalur
pending disposal of the above appeal thus render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. G.Nanmaran,
Special Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 and R3)
A.S. No. 325 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 3990 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit- II,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur.
... Appellant
Vs
1. Maruthamuthu,
S/o.Muthukaruppan,
Velipiringam,
Ariyalur Taluk And District.
3/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
2. Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai.
3. Deputy General Manager,
Tamil Nadu Cement Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in L.A.O.P.
No.63 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
PRAYER in C.M.P.: Petition filed under Order 41 Rules 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, to stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in
L.A.O.P. No. 63 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the Sub Court, Ariyalur
pending disposal of the above appeal thus render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. G.Nanmaran,
Special Government Pleader (AS)
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 and R3)
A.S. No. 331 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 4004 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit- II,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur. ... Appellant
Vs
4/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
1. Karupaiya,
S/o.Muthuvel
Velipringiyam,
Ariyalur Taluk And District.
2. Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai.
3. Deputy General Manager,
Tamil Nadu Cement Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in L.A.O.P.
No.59 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
PRAYER in C.M.P.: Petition filed under Order 41 Rules 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, to stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in
L.A.O.P. No. 59 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the Sub Court, Ariyalur
pending disposal of the above appeal thus render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. M.Murali,
Government Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 and R3)
5/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
A.S. No. 336 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 4010 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit – II,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur. ... Appellant
Vs
1. Pitchaipillai,
S/o. Kailasamoopanar,
Velipringiyam,
Ariyalur Taluk & District
2. Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai.
3. Deputy General Manager,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in L.A.O.P.
No.60 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
PRAYER in C.M.P.: Petition filed under Order 41 Rules 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, to stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in
L.A.O.P. No. 60 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the Sub Court, Ariyalur
pending disposal of the above appeal thus render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. M.Murali,
Government Advocate
6/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 and R3)
A.S. No. 342 of 2020 and C.M.P. No. 4127 of 2020:-
The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit – II,
TamilNadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur. ... Appellant
Vs
1. Marimuthu,
S/o Chinnappan,
Nerinchikorai,
Ariyalur Taluk & District.
2. Managing Director,
TamilNadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai.
3. Deputy General Manager,
TamilNadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur. ... Respondents
PRAYER in A.S.: Appeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, to set aside the judgment and decree passed in L.A.O.P.
No.84 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur and
pass such further or other order on this Court may deem fit and proper in the
circumstances of the case and this render justice.
PRAYER in C.M.P.: Petition filed under Order 41 Rules 5 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, to stay the execution of the decree and judgment passed in
7/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
L.A.O.P. No. 84 of 2001 dated 31.01.2017 on the Sub Court, Ariyalur
pending disposal of the above appeal thus render justice.
For Appellant : Mr. M.Murali,
Government Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. R.Gokulakrishnan, Advocate
(for R1)
Mr. A.Sivaji,
Standing Counsel (for R2 and R3)
COMMON JUDGMENT
Heard.
2. These appeals are preferred under Section 54 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894. They arises out of the awards passed by the Sub
Court, Ariyalur, in L.A.O.P. Nos. 83, 51, 63, 59, 60 and 84 of 2001
respectively, dated 31st January 2017. The acquisition relates to certain lands
in Ariyalur District for the establishment of a Government Cement Factory
under the Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited, hereinafter referred to
as TANCEM. The appellant before this Court in all the appeals is the Special
Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Unit–II, representing the acquiring authority.
3. The Government has issued a 4(1) notification dated 19.02.1996 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
the Land Acquisition Officer by awards dated 17.02.1999 and 26.03.1999 had
relied on private sale transactions in respect of nearby lands and fixed the
market value at Rs.300/- per cent. The landowners, not satisfied with this
valuation, sought a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
The Sub Court, Ariyalur, by its award dated 31.01.2017, enhanced the
compensation to Rs.1,200/- per cent, together with the usual statutory
benefits towards solatium, additional amount and interest.
4. The memorandum of appeals challenge the enhancement as
excessive and unsustainable. It is contended that the Reference Court relied
on sale deeds which were not comparable to the acquired lands, that the Land
Acquisition Officer’s dry-land data sales should have been accepted, and that
the Court below failed to apply a block-wise or belt system valuation or to
deduct a proper percentage for development. The appellant also questions the
award of interest on solatium and the additional amount.
5. The issues for consideration are:
(1) Whether the enhancement to Rs.1,200/- per cent requires
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
interference in the light of subsequent pronouncements of this Court in
companion appeals from the same acquisition? and
(2) Whether any development deduction has to be imposed or whether
uniform parity should be maintained?
6. It is now well settled through a long series of appeals arising from
the very same acquisition scheme that this Court has consistently taken a
view in favour of the landowners. By the common judgment dated 29 th
January 2024 in A.S. No. 916 of 2019 and connected matters, this Court
dismissed the appeals preferred by the State and by TANCEM, allowed the
cross-objections filed by the claimants, and enhanced the market value from
Rs.1,200/- per cent to Rs.1,500/- per cent, directing the payment of the
balance within eight weeks.
7. Subsequently, by order dated 23rd August 2024, S.M. Subramaniam,
J., recorded that TANCEM itself had passed a resolution—approved by the
Government—to pay compensation at the rate of Rs.1,500/- per cent, with
statutory interest, to all the landowners under this scheme, and directed the
Land Acquisition Officer to settle the enhanced compensation uniformly
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
within eight weeks. This shows that a conscious decision has been taken by
the acquiring authority to maintain parity and avoid any discrimination
among the affected landholders.
8. Again, on 23rd October 2024, in a batch of connected CMPs, Sathi
Kumar Sukumara Kurup, J., reiterated that the fixation of Rs.1,500/- per cent
in the earlier batch governs all connected cases, and observed that the
petitions seeking rehearing had become infructuous in view of the finality of
the common judgment, while granting four months time for TANCEM to
complete the payment.
9. In view of these determinations arising from the same acquisition
and involving the same acquiring body, there is no scope for a different view
in these appeals. To perpetuate a lower rate here would run counter to the
principle of equality and uniformity in compensation. The contentions
advanced on behalf of the appellant with regard to comparability, valuation,
or deduction are no longer open for re-consideration in the face of the later
common judgment and the uniform policy (resolution dated 13.03.2024)
adopted by TANCEM and the relevant portion of the said resolution dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
13.03.2024 is extracted hereunder;
“The Board took note that TANCEM acquired 1137.97.5 hectares
of land in 3 phases. The Board also took note that in 1999, 320.76
acres were acquired for which compensation was fixed at Rs.250/-
per cent and In the year 2000, 390 LAOP's demanding higher
compensation and enhanced compensation @ Rs.1250/- per cent
was flxed vide order dated 29.11.2012 against which TANCEM
filed Writ Petition in Hon'ble High Court of Madras and the cases
were remanded to Sub-Court, Ariyalur on 20.08.2014. The Board
further took note that the compensation was reduced to Rs.1,200/-
per cent. Subsequently, Special Tahsildar, Ariyalur filed Appeal
Suits for 319 cases and judgement pronounced for 300 cases @
Rs.900/-per cent totaling to Rs.10.26 crore and the amount was
deposited in Sub-court Ariyalur. The Board noted 20 appeals
were filed and enhanced rate was fixed between Rs.1200/- to
Rs.1500 per cent. The Board also noted that RDO convened fees
committee meeting in view of PH on 15.2.24 for mining lease of
92.22.6 ha at Pudupalayam village and demanded Rs.1,500/- per
cent at an approximate requirement of additional amount was
Rs.19 crore (approx).
Resolved that the proposal of TANCEM to settle the LAOP Cases
by payment of compensation fixed by Hon'ble HIgh Court,
Madras in the judgment dated 29.01.2024 at the rate of Rs.1500/-
per cent besides interest entitled as per section 23(2) of LA Act,
1894 be and is hereby approved.
Further resolved to accord approval for payment of
compensation for all other cases pending before Hon'ble High
Court, Madras / Sub-Court, Ariyalur as and when judgment is
pronounced at the rate of Rs.1500/- per çent plus interest as
finalized in Lokayuktha / Mediation so as to avoid further
litigation.”
10. On the question of development deduction, it is seen that the
subsequent batch decisions have proceeded on a flat rate of Rs.1,500/- per
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
cent, without applying any deduction towards development charges, the
acquisition being for an industrial and mining purpose and not for layout
formation. Any deduction at this stage would break the uniformity already
settled by this Court.
11.Accordingly, these appeals fail on merits. Following the common
judgment and the uniform decisions affirmed by this Court, the market value
of the acquired land is fixed at Rs.1,500/- (Rupees One Thousand Five
Hundred only) per cent, with no deduction towards development charges. The
awards passed by the reference court are modified by enhancing from
Rs.1,200/- to Rs.1500/-.The claimants are entitled to the statutory benefits
under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, to be
calculated on the enhanced amount.
12. Any sum already deposited shall be given due credit. The balance
compensation, together with all statutory additions and interest, shall be
deposited by the acquiring authority within eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this Judgment, to the credit of L.A.O.P. Nos. 83, 51, 63,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
59, 60 and 84 of 2001 respectively on the file of the Sub Court, Ariyalur. On
such deposit, the land owners are permitted to withdraw the same in
accordance with law. Thus the appeals are disposed of. There will be no
order as to costs. The connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. It is made
clear that though a Common Judgment is rendered in respect of these appeals,
the learned counsel for the parties are entitled to get separate fees in respect
of each appeal.
29.10.2025
vjt/ay
Index: Yes / No
Speaking Order / Non-speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes / No
To
1. The Sub-Court,
Ariyalur.
2. The Special Tahsildar, (L.A)
Unit II Arasu Cements Factory,
Ariyalur.
3. Managing Director,
Arasu Cements Corporation,
No.735, II Floor, LLA Building,
Annasalai,
Chennai.
4. Deputy General Manager,
Arasu Cements Factory,
Ariyalur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
5. Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Chennai.
6.The Special Tahsildar,
Land Acquisition Unit – II,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Limited,
Ariyalur.
7.Deputy General Manager,
Tamil Nadu Cements Corporation Ltd.,
Ariyalur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J
vjt/ay
A.S. Nos. 268, 295, 325, 331, 336 and 342 of 2020
and
C.M.P. Nos. 3816, 3990, 4004, 4010 and 4127 of 2020
29.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 29/10/2025 08:25:56 pm )
