T R DINAKARAN Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter arises under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to "as the Act"), the challenge is to a notification issued under Section 4(1) and the declaration under Section 6 of the Act, both under a common order in G.O.Ms.No,527, Transport Department dated 01.09.1976 and for consequential direction to the respondent to surrender possession of the land in survey No,301/1 and 302/2, Aruppukottai village, Virudhunagar District and pay damages for use and occupation. THE case of the petitioner is that his father late T.Ramasamy Naicker purchased various properties in Aruppukottai Village on different dates, when the villages were under the Ramanathapuram Jamin. THE properties, which are relevant for the purpose of this case were landed properties comprised in survey No. 301/1 (0.39 acres) 301/2 (0.45 acres) and 301/3a (2.02 acres) in all measuring a total extent of 2.86 acres in Aruppukottai village. Background facts:

(2.) THAT pursuant to a family partition dated 10.05.1958, these properties and other lands were allotted to the petitioner's share. According to the petitioner, he continued to be possession and the enjoyment of the said properties. It is further stated that after the Zamins Abolition Act, the land in survey Nos.301/1 and 301/2 were wrongly registered as 'assessed waste dry'. According to the petitioner, this mistake was due to wrong correlation of pymash numbers and despite this wrong correlation the name of the petitioner's father was found entered for one Survey No. and his vendor's name was entered in the other survey No.

(3.) THE issue in the present writ petition relates to the lands covered in the other two Survey Nos, which was also subject matter of the same acquisition proceedings, namely Survey Nos.301/1 & 301/2. THE case of the petitioner is that no award has been passed in respect of those two survey nos and after W.P.No.11205/86 was allowed, a legal notice dated 14.02.1990, was issued by the petitioner to the respondents calling upon them to surrender possession of the lands or pay the then market value within two months from the date of receipt of notice. This demand was reiterated after the dismissal of the Writ Appeal on 28.05.1999 followed by reminders dated 07.06.1999, 26.07.1999 and 27.12.1999. THErefore, the petitioner would contend that till date the respondents have not surrendered the lands nor passed an award and in view of the limitation prescribed under Section 11A of the Act, the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed. On the above stated grounds, the writ petition has been filed. Contentions: