Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Petitioner vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jun 30, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190112

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190112
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: M. Venugopal
Decided On: Jun 30, 2016
Case Number: Cont.P.(MD).No. 764 of 2015
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Petitioner

Respondent

Excerpt

1. there is no representation on the side of the petitioner. however, this court has heard the learned additional government pleader appearing the respondent. 2. the learned additional government pleader appearing the respondent submits that as per the direction of this court issued in w.p.(md).no.18020 of 2014, dated 10.11.2014 and the recommendation of the special tahsildar (sss), thovalai, kanyakumari district, a proposal, for sanctioning a sum of rs.92,500/- i.e a sum of rs.90,000/- towards accident relief and rs.2,500/- towards personal expenses to the petitioner for the death of her husband, was sent to the commissioner of land reforms, as per the respondent's office letter dated 29.12.2014 and the same was informed to the petitioner, through a registered communication dated 29.12.2014. it appears that the commissioner of land reforms has also sent the said proposal to the government for sanctioning the aforesaid amount towards the petitioner, as per letter dated 12.03.2015. 3. in the instant case, although on the side of the respondent/district collector, kanyakumari district, steps were taken as regards the sanctioning of a total sum of rs.92,500/- and the payment to be made to the petitioner even as early as on 29.12.2014, subsequently, the commissioner of land reforms had also sent proposals to the government for sanctioning the sum of rs.92,500/- to the petitioner, as per letter dated 12.03.2015. till date, there is no much headway in the subject matter in issue. therefore, to secure the ends of justice, this court grants a final chance/final opportunity to the respondent to comply with the order of this court, dated 10.11.2014 passed by this court in w.p.(md).no.18020 of 2014 and in this regard, time is granted till 21.07.2016. 4. the registry is directed to list the matter on 22.07.2016.

Full Judgment

1. There is no representation on the side of the petitioner. However, this Court has heard the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing the respondent.

2. The Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing the respondent submits that as per the direction of this Court issued in W.P.(MD).No.18020 of 2014, dated 10.11.2014 and the recommendation of the Special Tahsildar (SSS), Thovalai, Kanyakumari District, a proposal, for sanctioning a sum of Rs.92,500/- i.e a sum of Rs.90,000/- towards accident relief and Rs.2,500/- towards personal expenses to the petitioner for the death of her husband, was sent to the Commissioner of Land Reforms, as per the respondent's Office letter dated 29.12.2014 and the same was informed to the petitioner, through a registered communication dated 29.12.2014. It appears that the Commissioner of Land Reforms has also sent the said proposal to the Government for sanctioning the aforesaid amount towards the petitioner, as per letter dated 12.03.2015.

3. In the instant case, although on the side of the respondent/District Collector, Kanyakumari District, steps were taken as regards the sanctioning of a total sum of Rs.92,500/- and the payment to be made to the petitioner even as early as on 29.12.2014, subsequently, the Commissioner of Land Reforms had also sent proposals to the Government for sanctioning the sum of Rs.92,500/- to the petitioner, as per letter dated 12.03.2015. Till date, there is no much headway in the subject matter in issue. Therefore, to secure the ends of Justice, this Court grants a final chance/final opportunity to the respondent to comply with the order of this Court, dated 10.11.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.18020 of 2014 and in this regard, time is granted till 21.07.2016.

4. The Registry is directed to list the matter on 22.07.2016.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Petitioner vs Respondent Same Subject Land Acquisition Same Judge M. Venugopal