KANNIAMMAL Vs. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE orders passed in the unnumbered memo filed by the claimants in LAOP. Nos. 102, 103, 107 and 108 of 1992 and LAOP. No. 391 of 1993 respectively on the file of the learned Subordinate Judge (Land Acquisition Tribunal), Poonamallee, are under challenge in these revisions respectively.

(2.) LAOP. NOS. 102, 103, 107 and 108 of 1992 and LAOP. No. 391 of 1993 have been filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. An award was passed on 11. 10. 1991 by the Land Acquisition Officer and on the appeal preferred by the Government, this Court had remanded all the matters to the Tribunal for reconsideration of the same on the basis of the additional evidence produced. Even after remand, the Land Acquisition Tribunal had passed an award without altering the previous award, which was challenged before this High Court. After passing of the awards for the second time, the claimants have filed petitions for withdrawal of 50% of the award amount already been deposited by the Government. This Court had passed an order permitting the claimants to withdraw 25% of the award amount in deposit without furnishing security and to withdraw the remaining 25% of the award amount in deposit by furnishing bank guarantee and accordingly, the claimants have withdrawn 25% of the award amount without furnishing any security and have withdrawn the remaining 25% of the award amount after furnishing bank guarantee.

(3.) NOW after knowing that the guarantee had already been expired, the claimants have filed the impugned Memo before the Land Acquisition Tribunal seeking direction to send a letter of communication to the Managing Director, Karur Vysya Bank, Thiruverkadu to permit the claimants to withdraw the amount deposited with Karur Vysya Bank, Thiruverkadu for issuance of bank guarantee, which was rejected by the Tribunal (Subordinate Judge, Poonamallee ).