Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.30 seconds)

Ponnusamy Chettiar vs The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar ... on 12 December, 2007

iii yet another judgment of this Court in the case of Immaculate Heart of Mary Society, Pudupalayam v. The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Sivaganga Pasumpon Devar District (para 8) The next question is whether there is any flaw in the acquisition proceedings initiated by the authorities. The acquired extent is 2.60 acres. While it is the case of the petitioner that the same is comprised in two survey numbers viz., S. No. 444/4 and 445/1, originally owned by Arockiasamy and Fr. Sebastian, the case of the respondents as reflected from Section 4(1) notification and counter affidavit is that the extent is sold by Arockiasamy. In fact, a specific stand is taken in the counter affidavit that in the revenue records, nothing is shown as regards the title of Sebastian in respect of the lands to be acquired.
Madras High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 1 - V Dhanapalan - Full Document

Ponnusamy Chettiar vs The Special Tahsildar on 12 December, 2007

iii yet another judgment of this Court reported in 2003 (1) CTC 449 in the case of Immaculate Heart of Mary Society, Pudupalayam vs. The Special Tahsildar, Adi Dravidar Welfare, Sivaganga Pasumpon Devar District (para 8) "The next question is whether there is any flaw in the acquisition proceedings initiated by the authorities. The acquired extent is 2.60 acres. While it is the case of the petitioner that the same is comprised in two survey numbers viz., S.No.444/4 and 445/1, originally owned by Arockiasamy and Fr. Sebastian, the case of the respondents as reflected from Section 4(1) notification and counter affidavit is that the extent is sold by Arockiasamy. In fact, a specific stand is taken in the counter affidavit that in the revenue records, nothing is shown as regards the title of Sebastian in respect of the lands to be acquired.
Madras High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - V Dhanapalan - Full Document
1