S.Santhanakrishnan v. G.Jeyaraj
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.09.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.(MD)No.14379 of 2025 1.S.Santhana Krishnan 2.B.Vignesh 3.Madurai Telugu Melakarargal Urvavinmurai Dharma Sthabanam, (Regd. No.140/2011) rep through its Secretary, S.Santhanakrishna @ Pandi, Having office at No.9, South Chitrai Street, Madurai-1.
... Petitioner /Vs./ 1.G.Jeyaraj 2.The District Collector, Collectorate, Madurai District, Madurai.
3.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special District Revenue Officer, Land Acquisition and Management, Madurai.
1/8
4.The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Highways, Unit-1, Madurai-20.
5.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil nadu State Highways Department, (Construction & Maintenance), Madurai-2.
6.G.Muthuramu ... Respondents PRAYER:- Writ Appeal - filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.17163 of 2025 dated 25.06.2025 on the file of this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.V.Sathya for Mr.PT.S.Narendravasan For R2 to R5 : Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader For R1 : Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.) W.P.(MD)No.17163 of 2025 was filed by the Managing Trustee of Madurai Telugu Melakarargal Uravinmurai Dharma Sthabanam, Madurai for a mandamus for depositing the compensation amount in I.A.No.1 of 2024 in unnumbered original suit of the year 2024 on the file 2/8
of the Principal Sub Court, Madurai. That writ petition stands disposed of on 15.06.2025 by way of the present impugned order. 2.The Court has noted that the subject matter of the lis relating to the rival claims in respect of the property in T.S.Nos.1 and 2, Block No.1 in Ward No.10 in Thiruvengadapuram in Tallakulam, Madurai. The Court has also noted the respondents' submission that the question of deposit of that amount in the unnumbered suit does not arise and hence, rejected that prayer. We concur that the deposit ought not to be in that suit under Section 92 of CPC, which is stated to have been filed in 2024. 3.In fact, the learned Single Judge has directed that the compensation, as per the statutory mandate under Section 21(2) r/w Section 22(3) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, be deposited on the file of the proper authority.
4.We had vide our order dated 01.09.2025, stated as follows: "3.The learned Judge, under order dated 25.06.2025, has rejected the prayer of the writ petitioner to deposit the compensation amount to the credit of the suit filed by him. As on date, we are given to understand that only I.A.No.1 of 2024 seeking leave under Section 96 is pending before the civil Court. Hence, the question of depositing the amount to the credit of that suit does not arise, in view of the 3/8
existence of rival claims to that amount. 4.To be noted that the rival claims in this case are between the Madurai Telugu Malakarargal Uravinmurai Dharma Sthabanam (1931 Trust) and a Society of the same name, registered in 2001 (erroneously stated as 2011). Compensation, in the event of dispute has to be deposited in line with procedure under Section 21(2) read with Section 22(3) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). 5.Section 21(2) of the Act reads as follows:
'21.Apportionment
(1) ...... W.A(MD)No.2495 of 2025 (2) When the amount has been determined under section 19, if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the same or any part thereof, or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the Collector may refer such dispute for the decision of the Court.' 6.Section 22(3) of the Act reads as follows:
'22.Payment of amount.(1) ......... (2) ......... (3) If the persons entitled to amount according to the decision of the Collector do not consent to receive it, or if there be no person competent to alienate the land or if there be any disputes as to the title to receive the amount, the Government shall deposit the amount so determined in the Court.' 7.Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader for R.2 to R.5, wishes to take instructions whether any dispute has been referred to the decision of the appropriate court. He will also confirm which the appropriate court is. Let an affidavit be filed by the District Collector in this regard."
4/8
5.We have inter alia weighed the rival claims between two sthapanams, which incidentally, have the identical name; the petitioner, which is registered in the year 1931, and the society of the same name, registered in the year 2001. An affidavit has been filed by the second respondent /District Collector, wherein he reiterates the facts as set out in the impugned order and that permission is being sought from the jurisdictional Court to comply with the directions under the impugned order.
6.The affidavit of the District Collector makes reference only to compensation of a sum of Rs.1,03,87,480/-. Mr.Meenakshi Sundaram, learned counsel for R1 states that the aforesaid amount has been awarded as compensation under award dated 03.06.2023. In addition, he refers to an additional award dated 12.08.2025, in terms of which, additional compensation of a sum of Rs.3,95,32,220/- has also been granted. Mr.Maharajan accedes to the correctness of this submission. In light of the aforesaid, both the aforesaid amounts i.e., Rs.1,03,87,480/- and Rs. 3,95,32,220/- will be transferred to the competent Court within a period of two weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order, in terms of 5/8
Section 53(1)(a) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, which sets out the procedure for transfer of the amount through single nodal account.
7.Let the amount be transferred within a period of two weeks from date of receipt of a copy of this order. Let the Court ensure that the amount, on receipt, is transferred to an interest bearing account in a Nationalized Bank.
8.R3 will serve a copy of the award to both the appellant as well as R1. We make it clear that the proper authority, who is entitled to the award, is to be decided in the pending suit and the direction to serve copy of the award is at their request in the present case. 9.The Writ Appeal is closed confirming the order of the Writ Court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 09.09.2025 NCC :Yes/No Internet :Yes ta 6/8
To 1.The District Collector, Collectorate, Madurai District, Madurai.
2.The Land Acquisition Officer/ Special District Revenue Officer, Land Acquisition and Management, Madurai.
3.The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition Highways, Unit-1, Madurai-20.
4.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Tamil nadu State Highways Department, (Construction & Maintenance), Madurai-2.
7/8
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
ta 09.09.2025 8/8