R SHANMUGANATHAN Vs. APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY NO 1

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are aggrieved by the compulsory purchase of the property belonging to them as co-owners. THE petitioners are parties to a decree in which the shares possessed by them in that property were declared. THE extent of shares had been set out by them in Form No. 37-I in column No. 4 which requires disclosure of the names of persons interested in that property and in the consideration, specifying the shares and the basis thereof.

(2.) THE shares of two of the petitioners Kalyankumar and Senthilkumar, were 1/33 each of the value of Rs. 1,21,212. THE share of the petitioner Loganayaki was 4/33 and was of the value of Rs. 4,84,850. THE share of the petitioner Parvathavardhini was 3/33 of the value of Rs. 3,63,636. THE share of Shanmuganathan was 11/33 and was of the value of Rs. 13,33,333. THE share of the petitioner Kanakasabapathy was 13/33 and was of the value of Rs. 15,75,707.

(3.) THE property in question is a residential property and the property still remains with the Revenue, in view of the stay order that was issued by this court, after this writ petition was admitted. Even before the writ petition was filed, the authority had taken possession of the property and shortly before the petition was filed had paid to each of them their amounts in proportion to their shares in the property. THE petitioners received the monies only by reason of the fact that the possession had been obtained by the authority and not because they had agreed to or accepted compulsory purchase. Even if it can be held that the petitioners had willingly received the amounts, having regard to the fact that the shares of such of the petitioners the value of which shares was less than Rs. 10,00,000, their shares could not have been compulsorily acquired by the authority under Chapter XX-C.