{"id":132380,"date":"2011-02-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2011-02-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011"},"modified":"2015-05-29T03:20:48","modified_gmt":"2015-05-28T21:50:48","slug":"the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","title":{"rendered":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 18\/02\/2011\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR\n\nA.S.No.690 of 2004\nand C.M.P.No.10671 of 2004\n\nThe Special Tahsildar,\nLand Acquisition,\nSouth Neighbourhood Scheme,\nUnit-I,\nMadurai - 20.\t\t    .. Appellant\/Referring Officer\n\nvs.\n\n1.R.Saroja\t\t    .. 1st Respondent\/Claimant\n2.The Executive Engineer and\n    Administrative Officer,\n  Tamilnadu Housing Board,\n  Madurai.\t\t    .. 2nd Respondent\/Beneficiary\n\nPRAYER\n\nAppeal Suit filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894\nagainst the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2001, made in L.A.O.P.No.132 of 1994\nby the learned III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.\n\n!For Appellant \t\t... Mr.D.Gandhiraj\n\t\t  \t    Government Advocate\n^For 1st Respondent\t... Mr.R.Aravindan\nFor 2nd Respondent\t... Mr.P.Thilak Kumar\n\t\t\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n
\tThe Referring Officer (land Acquisition Officer) under the Land
\nAcquisition Act has come forward with the present appeal filed under Section 54
\nof the Land Acquisition Act, against the award passed by the Court below, to
\nwhich a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made,
\ndirecting payment of enhanced compensation. The said award of the Court below
\nwas passed on 30.04.2001 in L.A.O.P.No.132 of 1994 on the file of the III
\nAdditional Subordinate Judge, Madurai.\n<\/p>\n
\t2. An extent of 1.05 acres of dry land comprised in S.No.44\/6 along with
\nother lands belonging to other persons in Thoppur Village was acquired by the
\nGovernment for the Tamil Nadu Housing Board for Madurai South Neighbourhood
\nScheme, Unit-I. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value of the
\nacquired land as on the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
\nAcquisition Act at Rs.4,500\/- per acre, equivalent to Rs.45\/- per cent and
\nawarded a total sum of Rs.7,831.05, which includes other statutory benefits,
\nnamely 30% solatium and 12% additional market value. Not satisfied with the
\nquantum of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer, the first
\nrespondent herein, namely the claimant, received the amount under protest and
\nmade a request for making a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition
\nAct to the Court for fixing a reasonable amount as compensation.\n<\/p>\n
\t3. Accordingly, a reference was made to the Court, which was taken on file
\nas L.A.O.P.No.132 of 1994 on the file of the III Additional Subordinate Judge,
\nMadurai. After having the claim statement of the claimant and the objection of
\nthe beneficiary filed into Court, the learned III Additional Subordinate Judge
\nconducted the trial in which three witnesses were examined as C.Ws.1 to 3 and
\nthree documents were marked as Exs.C1 to C3 on the side of the first respondent
\nherein\/claimant. No witness was examined and no document was marked either on
\nthe side of the appellant herein, namely the referring officer or on behalf of
\nthe second respondent herein, the beneficiary of the land acquisition.\n<\/p>\n
\t4. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned III Additional Subordinate
\nJudge, Madurai considered the pleadings and evidence in the light of the
\narguments advanced on either side and upon such consideration, came to the
\nconclusion that the first respondent\/claimant was entitled to enhanced
\ncompensation by calculating the market value at the rate of Rs.2,500\/- per cent,
\nbased on Ex.C.2, a copy of the award passed by the Court in L.A.O.P.No.1 of
\n1996, relating to an adjacent land acquired under the very same scheme in
\nrespect of S.No.27\/3A1B and 27\/4B3 of the very same village.\n<\/p>\n
\t5. The Court below has also calculated other statutory benefits like 30%
\nsolatium under Section 23(2) and additional market value at the rate of 12% p.a.
\nfrom the date of 4(1) notification till the date of award or taking possession,
\nwhich ever was earlier, as per Section 23(1-A) and also directed payment of
\ninterest for the enhanced amount of compensation in accordance with Section 28
\nof the Land Acquisition Act at the rate of 9% p.a. for a period of one year from
\nthe date of taking possession and thereafter, at the rate of 15% p.a. till the
\ndate of deposit of the enhanced amount of compensation.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. The said award in L.A.O.P.No.132 of 1994 passed by the learned III
\nAdditional Subordinate Judge, Madurai is impugned in the present appeal by the
\nland acquisition officer (referring officer). The beneficiary has been arrayed
\nas the second respondent in the appeal, whereas the claimant figures as the
\nfirst respondent.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. The points that arise for consideration in this appeal are:\n<\/p>\n
1.Whether the market value fixed by the Court below for the acquired land as on
\nthe date of 4(1) notification is excessive? and\n<\/p>\n
2.Whether the amount awarded as enhanced compensation by the Court below is
\nexcessive requiring downward revision?\n<\/p>\n
\t8. The submissions made by Mr.D.Gandhiraj, learned Government Advocate
\n(Criminal side), Mr.R.Aravindan, learned counsel for the first
\nrespondent\/claimant and Mr.P.Thilakkumar, learned Standing Counsel for Tamil
\nNadu Housing Board for the second respondent\/beneficiary were heard.  The
\nmaterials available on records were also perused.\n<\/p>\n
\t9. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act for
\nacquiring the property concerned in this appeal was issued on 24.12.1986. But
\nthe award was passed by the land acquisition officer on 01.02.1989. The Land
\nAcquisition Officer fixed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of
\nRs.45\/- per cent, which is equivalent to Rs.4,500\/- per acre. Not satisfied with
\nthe quantum of compensation thus awarded, the first respondent\/claimant seems to
\nhave paved the way for a reference being made to the Court under Section 18 of
\nthe Land Acquisition Act by submitting a requisition to the Land Acquisition
\nOfficer.\n<\/p>\n
\t10. In a reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the
\nCourt is not expected to assume jurisdiction of an appellate forum, as the
\nL.A.O.P. is not an appeal against the award passed by the Land Acquisition
\nOfficer. The amount specified in the award passed by the Land Acquisition
\nOfficer is nothing but an offer made by the State towards payment of
\ncompensation.  A claimant, who is not satisfied with the amount that is offered,
\nis given a right to seek a reference to the Court for fixing the reasonable
\ncompensation. As such, in a reference made under Section 18 of the Land
\nAcquisition Act, the claimant shall take the position equivalent to a plaintiff
\nand the referring officer and the beneficiary shall take the position equivalent
\nto the defendants. The claimant, being placed in a position equivalent to the
\nplaintiff, shall prove by evidence that the market value of the acquired land as
\non the date of 4(1) notification was more than the amount fixed by the Land
\nAcquisition Officer and that he\/she will be entitled to get more amount as
\ncompensation than what was awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer.\n<\/p>\n
\t11. In this contest, the first respondent herein\/claimant, besides
\nexamining three witnesses on her side as C.Ws.1 to 3, has also produced three
\ndocuments marked as Exs.C.1 to C3.\n<\/p>\n
\t12. Ex.C.1 is the copy of the award passed by the learned I Additional
\nSubordinate Judge in L.A.O.P.No.258 of 1989 in respect of a neighbouring land,
\nnamely S.No.85\/5 of the very same village, which was also acquired for Madurai
\nSouth Neighbourhood Scheme. The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land
\nAcquisition Act for the acquisition of the said land was made on 14.08.1985. In
\nthe said L.A.O.P., the learned I Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai fixed the
\nmarket value at the rate of Rs.1,000\/- per cent and awarded enhanced
\ncompensation. The same may provide the basis for finding out the value of the
\nacquired land concerned in this appeal as on the date of Section 4(1)
\nnotification, because of the proximity of time between the notifications issued
\nunder Section 4(1) in the said case and in the case on hand.\n<\/p>\n
\t13. Ex.C.2 is the certified copy of another award passed by the very same
\nCourt in L.A.O.P.No.1 of 1996 relating to some other survey numbers in the very
\nsame village that was acquired subsequently. In the said award, the learned I
\nAdditional Subordinate Judge, Madurai has fixed the market value of the land at
\nthe rate of Rs.2,500\/- per cent and awarded enhanced compensation. Ex.C.3 is the
\ncertified copy of the decretal order passed in L.A.O.P.No.1 of 1996.\n<\/p>\n
\t14. A perusal of the said documents Exs.C.2 and C.3 would show that 4(1)
\nnotification in respect of the lands concerned in those documents came to be
\nissued five years after the date of 4(1) notification issued in the case on
\nhand.  Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that fixing the market
\nvalue on par with the market value fixed as on 22.11.1991 in L.A.O.P.No.1 of
\n1996, which was five years later than the publication of 4(1) notification in
\nthis case, shall not be proper.  Therefore, the contention of the appellant that
\nthe fixation of the market value of the acquired on the basis of Exs.C2 and C3
\nmade by the Court below is not proper has got be countenanced. Hence, this Court
\ndeems it fit to prefer the valuation made in Ex.C.1, provided it has not been
\nmodified in appeal.\n<\/p>\n
\t15. So far as Ex.C.1 is concerned, it is also represented by the learned
\nGovernment Advocate that the same was modified subsequently by the High Court in
\nan appeal. But a copy of the judgment has not been produced. On the other hand,
\nthe learned Government Advocate has produced a copy of a common judgment made by
\na Division Bench of the this Court in A.S.No.521 of 1999 and batch cases, in
\nwhich a reference was made to the judgment pronounced by this Court in
\nA.S.No.884 of 1992, wherein for a land acquired for the very same purpose under
\nthe very same scheme, in respect of which notification under Section 4(1) was
\nissued on 13.11.1985, was valued by this Court at the rate of Rs.825\/- per cent.
\nThe date of 4(1) notification concerned in the case dealt with by this Court in
\nA.S.No.884 of 1992 is in close proximity with the date of 4(1) notification
\nissued in the case on hand. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to take the said
\namount fixed in A.S.No.884 of 1992 as the basis for fixing the market value of
\nthe acquired land in the case on hand as on the date of issue of Section 4(1)
\nnotification. Since there was a time gap of one year 13 months between the date
\nof 4(1) notification issued in the said case and the case on hand, this Court
\nhas to take into account the escalation in the market value during the said
\nperiod. It is pertinent to note that the market value of the land from
\n13.11.1985 till November, 1991 has increased to Rs.2,000\/- per cent from
\nRs.825\/- per cent, which is evident from the above said judgment of the Division
\nBench dated 15.09.2003. The following chart will show the gradual increase in
\nthe market value:\n<\/p>\n
Date of 4(1) Notification     Case Number    Rate per cent\n                                                  Rs.\n\n    13.11.1985       A.S.No.884 of 1992 Batch    825<\/span>\n\n  November, 1991     A.S.No.521 of 1999 Batch   2,000\n\n<\/pre>\n
\t16. One should not lose sight of the fact that there had been such a steep
\nescalation of the market value because of the developments made in the lands
\nacquired under the Madurai South Neighbourhood Scheme, earlier to the
\nacquisition concerned in the batch cases dealt with by the Division Bench of
\nthis Court.  Therefore, this Court is of the view that the increase in the
\nmarket value would have gained momentum on pace with the developments made.
\nTaking all these aspects into consideration, this Court deems it fit to fix the
\nmarket value of the acquired land as on the date of 4(1) notification in the
\ncase on hand, namely 24.12.1986, at Rs.1,000\/- per cent, which shall be quite
\nreasonable. Based on the above said fixation of the market value and the total
\ncompensation is worked out as follows:\n<\/p>\n
1.Market value of the acquired land
\n(1.05 acre) at the rate of Rs.1,000\/-\n<\/p>\n
per cent\t\t\t\t\t= Rs.1,05,000\n<\/p>\n
2.Solatium at the rate of 30% under
\nSection 23(2) of the Land Acquisition
\nAct.\t\t\t\t\t        = Rs.  31,500\n<\/p>\n
3.Additional market value under Section
\n23(1-A) calculated at the rate of 12%
\nfrom the date of 4(1) notification
\ni.e., 24.12.1986 till date of award
\ni.e., 01.02.1989 as possession was
\ntaken subsequently (2 years one month
\nand 8 days)\t\t\t\t        = Rs.  26,530\n<\/p>\n
4.Total amount of compensation\t\t        = Rs.1,63,030\n<\/p>\n
5.The amount awarded by the Land
\nAcquisition Officer\t\t\t        = Rs.\t 7,831\n<\/p>\n
6.The enhanced compensation to which
\nthe first respondent\/claimant is
\nentitled \t\t\t\t\t= Rs.1,55,199
\n   Rounded of to\t\t\t\t= Rs.1,55,200<\/p>\n
Accordingly, the points 1 and 2 for determination are answered and the enhanced
\namount of compensation awarded by the Court below is reduced to Rs.1,55,200\/-
\n(Rupees One Lakh Fifty Five Thousand and Two Hundred only), which amount shall
\ncarry interest at 9% p.a. for one year from the date of taking possession and
\nthereafter at the rate of 15% p.a.<\/p>\n
\t17. In the result, this appeal is allowed in part and the award of the
\nlearned III Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai in L.A.O.P.No.132 of 1994 is
\nmodified by fixing the enhanced compensation at Rs.1,55,200\/- (Rupees One Lakh
\nFifty Five Thousand and Two Hundred only), which amount shall be paid to the
\nfirst respondent\/claimant with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. for one year from
\n17.03.1989, the date on which possession was taken by the Government and
\nthereafter at the rate of 15% p.a. till payment. Consequently, connected
\nC.M.P.No.10671 of 2004 is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n
To<\/p>\n
1. The III Additional Subordinate Judge,
\n   Madurai.\n<\/p>\n
2. The Special Tahsildar,
\n   Land Acquisition,
\n   South Neighbourhood Scheme,
\n   Unit-I,
\n   Madurai – 20.\n<\/p>\n
3. The Executive Engineer and
\n    Administrative Officer,
\n   Tamilnadu Housing Board,
\n   Madurai.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18\/02\/2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.SHIVAKUMAR A.S.No.690 of 2004 and C.M.P.No.10671 of 2004 The Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, South Neighbourhood Scheme, Unit-I, Madurai – 20. .. Appellant\/Referring Officer vs. 1.R.Saroja .. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-132380","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011\",\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\"},\"wordCount\":2141,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\",\"name\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011","datePublished":"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011"},"wordCount":2141,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011","name":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2011-02-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-28T21:50:48+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-r-saroja-1st-on-18-february-2011#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Special Tahsildar vs R.Saroja .. 1St on 18 February, 2011"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132380","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=132380"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/132380\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=132380"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=132380"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=132380"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}