Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

G. Mohan Vs. Chennai Metro Rail Limited (Cmrl) Rep by the Chief General Manager (Public Relations Officer) and Others

G. Mohan vs Chennai Metro Rail Limited (Cmrl) Rep by the Chief General Manager (Public Relations Officer) and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Aug 14, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/934040

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Writ Appeal No.1742 of 2012 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2012
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

G. Mohan

Advocate For the Appellant : R. Malaichamy, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1 and R2, V. Ramajagadeesan, R3, Mrs. V. Anuradha, Advocates, R4, No Appearance.

Respondent

Chennai Metro Rail Limited (Cmrl) Rep by the Chief General Manager (Public Relations Officer) and Others

Excerpt

(prayer: appeal filed under clause 15 of the letters patent against the order of this court passed in w.p.no.1946 of 2012 dated 27.06.2012. writ petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india praying to issue a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent not to make payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of land and building of the food corporation of india (south zone) employees’ co-operative society limited, mscs/cr - 23/96 situated at 114/171, prakasam salai, chennai 600 106 to the third respondent his man or to any other persons till a new board of directors are elected and assume office.) in course of arguments, we have been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the compensation amount has been deposited and subsequently, disbursed to the third respondent-society. however, the appellant is aggrieved by that portion of the order by which the learned single judge imposed costs of rs.10,000/- payable by the appellant to the third respondent-society. in the facts and circumstances of the case, after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we modify the order in so far as it relates to payment of costs by waiving the costs so imposed. the writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. no costs. consequently, miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.1946 of 2012 dated 27.06.2012. Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent not to make payment of compensation in lieu of acquisition of land and building of the Food Corporation of India (South Zone) Employees’ Co-operative Society Limited, MSCS/CR - 23/96 situated at 114/171, Prakasam Salai, Chennai 600 106 to the third respondent his man or to any other persons till a new board of directors are elected and assume office.)

In course of arguments, we have been informed by the learned counsel appearing for the parties that the compensation amount has been deposited and subsequently, disbursed to the third respondent-society. However, the appellant is aggrieved by that portion of the order by which the learned single Judge imposed costs of Rs.10,000/- payable by the appellant to the third respondent-society. In the facts and circumstances of the case, after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we modify the order in so far as it relates to payment of costs by waiving the costs so imposed. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial