Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2019 DAILYLAW 3605 (MAD)

S.Sathiyamurthy (DIED), v. The State of Tamil Nadu

WP/25552/2019 · 2026-03-11

Krishnan Ramasamy

Transfer Petitionbody2019

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

WP No. 25552 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11-03-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY WP No. 25552 of 2019 1. S.Sathiyamurthy (DIED), S/o.Shanmugam, No.514, K.N.K. Road Backside, Erode-3 2.S.Rajeswari, W/o. Late S.Sathiyamurthy, Door No.1, Valliammal Street, Surampatti Village, Erode Taluk, Erode 638 009, Tamil Nadu. 3.Bhuvaneswari, S/o. Late S.Sathiyamurthy, Door No.1, Valliammal Street, Surampatti Village, Erode Taluk, Erode 638 009, Tamil Nadu. 4.S.Krishna, D/o. Late S.Sathiyamurthy, Door No.1, Valliammal Street, Surampatti Village, Erode Taluk, Erode 638 009, Tamil Nadu. 5.S.Saroja, M/o. Late S.Sathiyamurthy, Door No.1, Valliammal Street, Surampatti Village, Erode Taluk, Erode 638 009, Tamil Nadu. (P2 TO P5 SUBSTITUTED AS LRs OF DECEASED SOLE PETITIONER VIDE ORDER DT 27.03.2023 MADE IN WMP.7784/2021 IN WP.25552/2019 BY MSRJ) Petitioner(s) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 25552 of 2019 Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009 2.The Managing Director Tamil Nadur Housing Board, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035 3.The Special Tahsildar (L.A.) Hosur Housing Unit, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District Respondent(s) PRAYER:-Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for an issuance of Writ of Declaration, declaring that the Land Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 in respect of the land measuring an extent of 0.24.0 Hectare(59 ½ cents) comprised in Survey No.670/1A of Hosur Village and Taluk, Krishnagiri District, covered by Notification issued under section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide G.O.Ms.No.849/Housing and Urban Development Department dated 21.05.1991 and Section 6 Declaration issued in G.O.Ms.537 dated 18.08.1992 are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re- settlement Act, 2013. For Petitioner(s): Mr.K.Govi Ganesan For Respondent(s): Mr.T.K.Saravanan Additional Government Pleader For R1 & R3 Mr.S.Ramachandran Standing Counsel For R2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 25552 of 2019 ORDER This writ petition has been filed seeking to declare the Acquisition Proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 in respect of the land measuring an extent of 0.24.0 Hectare(59 ½ cents) comprised in Survey No.670/1A of Hosur Village and Taluk, Krishnagiri District, covered by Notification issued under section 4(1) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 vide G.O.Ms.No.849/Housing and Urban Development Department dated 21.05.1991 and Section 6 Declaration issued in G.O.Ms.537 dated 18.08.1992 are deemed to have lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Re- settlement Act, 2013. 2.Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 3 would submit that the petitioner has challenged the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The petitioner herein is the subsequent purchaser. The aforesaid notification has been issued in the name of his vendor. The right of the subsequent purchaser has already been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shiv Kumar and Another vs. Union of India and Another reported in (2019) 10 supreme Court Cases 229, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the subsequent purchaser https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 25552 of 2019 cannot challenge the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. 3.As rightly contended by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 3, since the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the subsequent purchaser cannot challenge the notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the above mentioned Shiv Kumar case, the petitioner cannot challenge the impugned proceedings. Hence, no further orders can be passed in the present case. 4.In view of the above, this writ petition stands closed. No costs. 11-03-2026 rst Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 25552 of 2019 To 1.The Secretary to Government, The State of Tamil Nadu, Housing and Urban Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009 2.The Managing Director Tamil Nadur Housing Board, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035 3.The Special Tahsildar (L.A.) Hosur Housing Unit, Bagalur Road, Hosur, Krishnagiri District https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No. 25552 of 2019 KRISHNAN RAMASAMY J. rst WP No. 25552 of 2019 11-03-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis