BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17/04/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL C.R.P.(NPD)No.367 of 2009 Jeyaraj Nadar ... Revision Petitioner/Petitioner/Claimant Vs. Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition) Kodumidiyaru Nambiyaru Reservior Project, Valliyoor. ... Respondent/Respondent/ Referring Officer Prayer Revision Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, against the order against the order of the Additional District Court, (Fast Track Court No.1), Tirunelveli, dated 05.11.2008 in E.A.No.811 of 2008 in L.A.O.P.No.30 of 2002. !For Petitioner ... Mr.V.M.Balamohan Thambi ^For Respondent ... Mr.K.Nallathambi,AGP :ORDER
The revision petitioner/claimant has filed the Civil Revision Petition as
against the order dated 05.11.2008 in E.A.No.811 of 2008 in L.A.O.P.No.30 of
2002 passed by the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1),
Tirunelveli in dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner
praying for issuance of a cheque of Rs.9,59,687/- in favour of his counsel.
2. It transpires that the revision petitioner/claimant has filed
E.A.No.811 of 2008 in L.A.O.P.No.30 of 2002 before the learned Additional
District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Tirunelveli inter alia stating that the
respondent/referring officer has deposited a sum of Rs.9,61,155/- towards the
compensation in respect of the land that has been acquired and therefore, has
prayed for an issuance of cheque for a sum of Rs.9,59,687/- in favour of his
counsel before the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1),
Tirunelveli. The respondent/ referring officer has filed a counter stating that
an appeal has been filed against the enhanced award amount in A.S.No.26 of 2007
before this Court and in such cases, the appellate court would allow the
claimant to withdraw 25% of the award amount without security and that the
claimant has to seek permission only from the appellate forum.
3. After contest, the learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court
No.1), Tirunelveli has dismissed the application stating that in view of the
appeal having been filed by the respondent/referring officer before the High
Court has not been inclined to allow the application and resultantly dismissed
the same.
4. It is not in dispute that A.S.No.26 of 2007 has been filed before this
Court as against the award dated 20.08.2003 in L.A.O.P.No.30 of 2002 by the
learned Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1), Tirunelveli.
Therefore, in all fairness, this Court opines that the revision
petitioner/claimant is to approach this Court in appeal forum namely, in
A.S.No.26 of 2007 before this Court and to seek appropriate remedy in regard to
seeking permission for withdrawal of amount deposited by the respondent and in
that view of the matter, the Civil Revision Petition fails and the same is
hereby dismissed.
5. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is dismissed leaving the
parties to bear their own costs. The order passed by the trial court dated
05.11.2008 in E.A.No.811 of 2008 in L.A.O.P.No.30 of 2002 is confirmed for the
reasons assigned by this Court in this revision. However, taking into account
of an overall assessment of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court
permits the revision petitioner/claimant to file necessary application in
A.S.No.26 of 2007 pending on the file of this Court and to seek remedy in the
manner known to law in regard to the withdrawal of the amount deposited by the
respondent to the credit of L.A.O.P.No.30 of 2002 before the trial court.
nbj
To
1.The Additional District Judge (Fast Track Court No.1),
Tirunelveli.
2.Special Tahsildar
(Land Acquisition)
Kodumidiyaru
Nambiyaru Reservior Project,
Valliyoor.
3.The Deputy Registrar (Judicial),
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
(to watch and report)