Palanisamy (Died) Nallammal (Died) Santha v. The Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition)
CMP.Nos.2054, 2074, 2075, 2076, 2077, 2080, 2082, 2086 and 2088 of AS.SR.Nos.209823, 209824, 209820, 209822, 209821, 209818, 209816, 209819 and 29817 of 2025 P.B.BALAJI, J.
The delay of 2288 days in one set of condone delay petitions and the delay of 2313 days in another set of condone delay petitions are sought to be condoned in preferring the respective First Appeals. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that, in respect of the very same acquisition, the compensation had been fixed at Rs.106/- per sq.ft. and the same has already attained finality. At the time when the matters were argued before the Tribunal, the said fact was not brought to the notice of the Tribunal either by the petitioners or by the respondents, which resulted in the Tribunal fixing the compensation at Rs.40/- and Rs.60/- per sq.ft. He would further submit that there is an 1/4
anomaly in arriving at a just and fair compensation, which necessitated the petitioners to prefer these appeals, and therefore, the delay deserves to be condoned in order to ensure that the land owners are not deprived of fair compensation for the valuable lands taken over by the State. 4.Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent would submit that the delay is inordinate and has not been satisfactorily explained. He would further contend that the market value is not uniform and depends upon several factors such as distance, location and other relevant criteria, and therefore, there cannot be a uniform fixation of Rs.106/- per sq.ft. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of these petitions.
5.I have carefully considered the submissions advanced made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.Admittedly, the petitioners are land owners whose valuable immovable properties have been taken over by the State, through 2/4
acquisition proceedings. The Courts have repeatedly held that such land owners are entitled to just and fair compensation and, in the process of rendering substantial justice, delay should not stand in the way. Though the delay appears to be inordinate on the face of it, the petitioners have attempted to explain the same and have shown sufficient cause for not preferring the appeals within the period of limitation. The objections with regard to the applicability of the value of Rs.106/- per sq.ft. are matters to be decided at the time of hearing of the appeals and need not be gone into at this preliminary stage.
7.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to condone the delay in filing the First Appeals. Accordingly, these Miscellaneous Petitions are ordered as prayed for.
09.02.2026 Kv Note: Registry is directed to number the Appeal Suits, if the papers are otherwise in order and post the main cases before the Joint Registrar (Appellate Side) for admission.
3/4
P.B.BALAJI, J.
kv CMP.Nos.2054, 2074, 2075, 2076, 2077, 2080, 2082, 2086 and 2088 of AS.SR.Nos.209823, 209824, 209820, 209822, 209821, 209818, 209816, 209819 and 29817 of 2025 09.02.2026 4/4